SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Pat) 164

S.N.MISHRA
Geeta Devi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

Chy.S.N.Mishra, J.

1. Thepetitioners, in this application, have challenged the order taking cognizance dated 5.4.1995 of an offence punishable under Sections 3/4 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 including the order dated 27.9.1995 by which the trial Court was refused to drop the proceeding on the ground mentioned in the order itself. The petitioners had earlier filed a quashing application challenging the order taking cognizance of the alleged offence which was subsequently withdrawn with a direction to raise the question before the trial Court which shall be considered in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, petitioners filed a petition before the trial Court praying therein to drop the proceeding on the ground that the very initiation of the proceeding is barred by limitation in terms of Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred to as the Code) which has been rejected by the trial Court.

2. Learned counsel submits the very order taking cognizance of the alleged offence is barred by limitation in as much as, the learned Magistrate without condoning the delay in terms of Section 473 of the Code passed the impugn





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top