Important Point
The object of having chapter XXXVI in Cr.P.C. is to protect persons from prosecution based on state grievances and complaints which may turn out to be vexatious.

Judgment

S. Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.-Leave is granted.

This appeal is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Rajas­than at Jabalpur in S.B.Crl. Revision No. 316/96 dated March 17, 1998 setting aside the order of discharge passed in favour of the appell­ants by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur on April 23, 1996.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be noted here.

3. Appellant No. 1 married the respondent in accordance with the Hindu rites on May 20, 1986. They were blessed with a girl on January 2, 1988. The respondent, in the complaint filed before the Court on October 18, 1995, alleged that she was beaten up by her husband, mother-in-law and sisters-in-law as her parents failed to satisfy the demand of dowry and ultimately she was pushed out of the house on October 13,1988. The complaint was filed against the appellants under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC read with Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, under Sec­tion 190(1) Cr.P.C., who ordered investigation by police. The police investigated the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and submitted charge-sheet (final report) under Section 498-A IPC on December 22, 1995. On that report the learned Magistrate took cognizance of offence under Sections 498-A as well as 406 IPC and issued summons to the appellants. The case was posted on April 23, 1996 for framing charges. On that day it was submitted on behalf of the accused that the com­plaint was barred by limitation and that referring the case for investigation to the police itself was bad, therefore, no charges could be framed against the accused. That plea of the appellants found favour from the learned Magistrate who discharged the appellants by his order dated April 23, 1996. The respondent challenged the validity of that order of the learned Magistrate before the High Court of Rajasthan in S.B.Cr. No. 316 of 1966. On March 17, 1998, the High Court set aside the order of the learned Magistrate and directed him to proceed with the case from the stage where he had discharged the accused and decide the same in accordance with law. It is that order of the High Court which is the subject-matter of this appeal.

4. Mr. Adarsh Goel, learned senior counsel appearing for the appel­lant, contended that the High Court has committed illegality in hold­ing that there was no delay in filing the complaint and in observing that even if there was delay in view of Section 468 Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate should not have overlooked the provisions of Sec­tion 473 Cr.P.C. He argued that no provision in Cr.P.C. provides that after taking cognizance, the learned Magistrate could not have dis­charged the appellants and that the reasons given by the High Court in setting aside the order of the learned Magistrate are erroneous in law.

5. Mr. Pallav Shishodia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, submitted that the respondent was subjected to cruelty and harassed for the demand of dowry and she was sent out of the matrimonial home, therefore, the High Court was justified in setting aside the order of the learned Magistrate who did not take note of Section 473 Cr.P.C. and directing him to proceed with the case.

On this above submissions, two questions arise for consideration, namely:

(i) whether the learned Magistrate can discharge an accused after taking cognizance of an offence by him but before the trial of the case; and

(ii) whether the learned Magistrate was right in discharging the appellants on the grounds that the complaint was barred by limitation under Section 468 Cr.P.C.

Point No. (i) :

5. The answer to this point can be found in Section 239 Cr.P.C. which is in the following terms :

“239. When accused shall be discharged.-If, upon considering the police report and the documents sent with it under Section 173 and making such examination, if any, of the accused as the Magistrate thinks necessary and after giving the