Cognizance in criminal proceedings is valid if the FIR is filed within the limitation period, relying on the date of filing complaints rather than the date of cognizance.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. Heard Ms. S. Kar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

2. This criminal petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [previously, Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973] is preferred seeking setting aside and quashing of the proceedings of G.R. Case no. 45/2017 and Police Report Case [PRC] no. 153/2024, which arose out of Joypur Police Station Case no. 04/2017, presently pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate [M], Lakhipur, Cachar [‘the Trial Court’, for short].

3. The facts relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the instant criminal petition can be narrated, briefly, at first. One Jadumoni Sharma, Officer In-Charge [I.O.], HSLC Examination Centre, Joypur Rajabazar, Cachar as the informant lodged the First Information Report [FIR] before the Officer In-Charge, Joypur Police Station on 17.02.2017 on the subject : ‘Regarding proxy candidates in the H.S.L.C. Exam., 2017 in the Joypur Rajabazar Centre, Cachar’.

4. In the FIR, the informant had inter-alia stated that 17^th of February, 2017 was the first day of Higher Secondary Leaving Certificate [HSLC] Examination, 2017. When the examination was being held at Joypur Rajabazar HSLC Examination Centre, the informant as the Supervising Officer with the help of other officials detected as many as ten persons who appeared as proxy candidates for ten nos. of HSLC examinees. After being detected, the proxy candidates were handed over to Police and the FIR was lodged to carry out necessary investigation in that connection. The FIR was received and registered as Joypur Police Station Case no. 04/2017 under Sections 448 /468/420/471/419 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC] on 17.02.2017.

5. After registration of the case, investigation was carried out. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet under Section 173[2], Code of Criminal Procedure [‘the Code’ and/or ‘CrPC’, for short] was submitted by the I.O. vide Charge-Sheet no. 08/2024 on 30.04.2024 finding a prima facie case against twenty nos. of accused persons for committing the offences under Sections 448 /468/420/471/419, IPC. The petitioner herein is one of the twenty charge-sheeted accused persons. It is stated that after submission of the Charge- Sheet, the Trial Court took cognizance on 25.06.2024 and issued processes to the charge-sheeted accused persons for their appearance before it.

6. The first issue raised in this criminal petition to assail the criminal proceedings of G.R. Case no. 45/2017 and Police Report Case [PRC] no. 153/2024, which arose out of Joypur Police Station Case no. 04/2017, and presently pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate [M], is that in view of the provisions contained in Section 468 , CrPC, the proceeding could not have proceeded further as the Trial Court is barred from taking cognizance. It is contended that after Joypur Police Station Case no. 04/2017 was registered on 17.02.2017, the Investigating Authority took more than seven years to submit the Charge- Sheet on 30.04.2024 and in view of the provisions contained in Section 468 [2][c], CrPC, the Trial Court could not have taken cognizance on the said Charge-Sheet on 25.06.2024 as a period of three years for taking cognizance had already expired.

7. It is, thus, contended that the entire proceedings has been time barred and is liable to be set aside and quashed.

8. Section 468 of the Code reads as under :-

468. Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation [1] Except as otherwise