ORDER

N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. - Cases lodged by the Pavagada Police before the Munsiff & J.M.F.C., Pavagada, came to be registered as C.C. Nos. 185 of 1986,183 of 1986 and 184 of 1986 against the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 477-A and 201 I.P.C.

2. After filing the charge-sheets, summons were issued to the respondent/accused returnable by 23.6.1986 on which day the respondent/accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and was released on bail. It was made out that there was a delay of 5 years 2 months and 25 days in filing the complaints. As the question of limitation was pointed out before the learned Magistrate, the learned Public Prosecutor contended that the complaints submitted were well within time. Moreover, the complaints were lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 477A and 201 I.P.C. and the limitation prescribed under Section 468 Cr. P.C. has no application on the cases. He also contended that the offences alleged were continuous offences. In support of his contention the learned Prosecutor relied upon the decisions, viz., Secretary, Agricultural Market Committee v. SVGO Mills1, State of Bihar v. Deokaram2, Ponney Singh v: