Settlement Commission orders being implemented can make continued stay of prosecution unnecessary, with cases to be decided accordingly.

Where Settlement Commission orders had been passed in favour of the assessees and were being implemented, continued interim stay of pending prosecution proceedings was held unnecessary. The High Court directed the trial Magistrate to consider the criminal cases in the light of the Settlement Commission orders, after those orders and the parties' submissions were placed on record. As the prosecutions were to be dealt with on that basis, no further stay was granted and the petitions were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the interim stay of the pending prosecution proceedings should continue after the Settlement Commission had passed orders in favour of the petitioners and those orders were being given effect to.

Analysis: The petitions sought stay of further proceedings in the pending criminal cases on the footing that the petitioners had approached the Settlement Commission and that the Commission had ultimately passed orders in their favour. The Court noted the joint statement that the Settlement Commission had passed orders, though the details were not fully available, and that the Department had fairly stated that those orders were being implemented. In that situation, the trial Magistrate was directed to dispose of the pending prosecutions in the light of the Settlement Commission's orders, after placing those orders before him along with the respective submissions of counsel. Since the prosecutions were to be considered in that manner, no further stay was required.

Conclusion: The request for continuation of stay was rejected and the petitions were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Once the Settlement Commission's orders are being given effect to, continued stay of the prosecution proceedings is unnecessary and the trial court may dispose of the cases in the light of those orders.

---