Parallel criminal prosecution cannot be stayed merely because income-tax appeals or penalty proceedings remain pending.

Pendency of income-tax assessment, penalty, or appellate proceedings does not by itself justify staying or quashing parallel criminal complaint proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. Where no illegality in the complaint is alleged, the mere fact that tax appeals are pending before the authorities or Tribunal is insufficient to suspend the prosecution. The High Court therefore rejected the request for stay and held that the criminal complaint could continue notwithstanding the ongoing tax proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal complaint proceedings could be stayed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, merely because income-tax assessment, penalty, or appellate proceedings were pending before the tax authorities and the Tribunal.

Analysis: The only relief sought was stay of the criminal proceedings; no illegality in the complaint was alleged. The Court relied on the principle that prosecution cannot be quashed or stayed merely because proceedings under the tax laws are pending, and noted that pendency of appeal before the Tribunal does not by itself justify interference with the criminal case. The Court also noticed that earlier stay orders of this Court had been passed without reference to the governing Supreme Court authority.

Conclusion: The request for stay of the criminal complaint was rejected; the pendency of the tax appeals did not warrant suspension of the prosecution.

Final Conclusion: The criminal complaint proceedings were allowed to continue notwithstanding the pending tax appellate proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: Pendency of assessment, penalty, or appellate proceedings under the tax laws does not by itself justify quashing or staying parallel criminal prosecution.

---