Back
N. ANAND VENKATESH
Kayalvizhi – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vaniyambadi Town Police Station, Vaniyambadi, Tirupathur – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Crime No.201 of 2015 on the file of Inspector of Police, Vaniyambadi Town Police Station, Thirupathur District and to quash the same.)
1. This petition has been filed challenging the FIR registered by the 1st respondent in Crime No.201 of 2015 for offence under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(1) of IPC.
2. Heard Mr.G.Vinodhkumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.A.Damodaran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent.
3. The short ground that has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the FIR was registered in the year 2015 and till date (eight years), no final report has been filed and hence, there is a bar to take cognizance under Section 468 of Cr.P.C., even if the investigation is completed and final report is filed before the concerned Court.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the final report has not been filed in this case.
5. The offence under Section 294(b) of IPC carries a maximum imprisonment of three months, the offenc
Cognizance of offences specified in an FIR is barred after the expiry of the period of limitation as per Section 468 of Cr.P.C.
The limitation period for filing a final report in criminal cases is strictly enforced, and any delay must be properly explained and condoned by the court to maintain the validity of the proceedings.
The court emphasized that proceedings are barred if the final report is not filed within the statutory time limit as per Section 468(2)(b) of Cr.P.C.
Delay beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 468 Cr.P.C. without filing a condonation petition under Section 473 Cr.P.C. bars taking cognizance of offences punishable with imprisonment....
The relevant date for computing the period of limitation under Section 468 Cr.P.C. is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of prosecution, not the date on which the Magistra....
FIR quashed due to limitation under Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. as offences attract max 2-year punishment and no charge sheet filed after 4 years.
Power under Section 473 of Cr.P.C to condone the delay was not exercised. The cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate overlooking the interdiction under Section 468 of Cr.P.C can under no circumst....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
