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

1960 Supreme(All) 56

M.C.DESAI
SITA RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.Swarup

M. C. DESAI, J.

( 1 ) THE simple question raised in this revision application is whether the complaint filed on 30-4-1958 for an offence under the Factories Act, 1948, the commission of which came to the notice of the Inspector on 31-1-1958, was "within three months of" the latter date or not. Under section 106 of the Factories Act no court can take cognizance of an, offence punishable under the Act unless complaint thereof is made "within three months of the date on which the alleged commission of the offence came to the knowledge of an Inspector. " if the period of three months is computed after excluding 31-1-1958, it is admittedly within three months, but if 31-1-1958 is taken to be the first day of the period of three months the complaint is admittedly not within three months. In B. P. Thakur v. State, 1959 All LJ 317 : (AIR 1959 All 787), I took the view that Section 12 of the Limitation Act applies, that consequently the date on which the offence came to the notice of the Inspector is to be excluded in computing the period, of three months and that even apart from Section 12 under the common law that day is to be excluded. Sri Jagdish Sarup asked me to reconsider the view ta














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