As per the case facts, the appeals stemmed from a reference to a larger bench concerning the automatic expiration of interim court orders after a set period, following a prior ... ruling. This situation raised concerns that justice might be unintentionally compromised. The question arose whether interim orders should automatically cease after a specific duration, and if such a practice is equitable and pragmatic, or if these orders should remain valid until a reasoned decision is made on an application for their termination. Finally, the Supreme Court clarified that a reasoned stay order, once issued in civil or criminal proceedings, remains active indefinitely unless explicitly time-bound, or until an application for its vacation is filed and a reasoned order is passed. This aims to prevent injustices and reduce the burden on courts, favoring a more pragmatic approach over a strictly technical one, thereby addressing issues arising from the prior judgment.