The limitation period for filing a charge sheet is determined by the date of FIR registration, not the filing date, and sufficient prima facie evidence exists to proceed with charges.

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.4030 of 2023 in C.C.No.424 of 2022, dated 28.12.2023 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District, dismissing the petition for discharge filed under Section 239 of Cr.P.C.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Banumathi mother of the petitioner approached the defacto complainant and borrowed a sum of Rs.8 lakhs, to meet out her family and other expenses, promising to repay the same within a period of three months; that when the said Banumathi failed to pay the amount, despite the lapse of more than 2 ½ years, the defacto complainant visited the petitioner's house on 24.07.2018 at about 08.00 am and demanded the said Banumathi to return the amount; that the said Banumathi abused the deacto complainant, pulled her and as a result of which, the defacto complainant fell down on the window rods and sustained bleeding injuries on her right arm and that the petitioner and her mother caused criminal intimidation.

3. On the basis of the complaint of the defacto complainant, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.97 of 2018 against two persons including the petitioner for the alleged offence under Sections 324 and 506(i) IPC. After completing the investigation, the respondent police filed a final report against two accused including the petitioner for the alleged offence under Sections 324 and 506(i) IPC and case was taken on file in C.C.No.424 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai. When the case was pending for framing of charges, the accused including the petitioner have filed a petition under Section 239 of Cr.P.C., seeking discharge from the above case.

4.The respondent police has filed a counter affidavit raising objections. The learned Magistrate, after enquiry, has passed the impugned order, dated 28.12.2023, dismissing the discharge application. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the present revision came to be filed.

5.The main reason canvassed for discharge is that the charge sheet filed by the respondent police is barred by limitation under Section 468 of Cr.P.C; that since the respondent police has registered FIR for the offence under Sections 324 and 506(i) IPC on 31.07.2018, they ought to have filed the charge sheet within three years ie., on or before 31.07.2021, but the charge sheet came to be filed only on 18.07.2022 and that since the case itself is barred by time, dismissal of discharge petition cannot legally be sustained.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the prosecution while filing the charge sheet has also filed a petition in Cr.M.P.4836 of 2022 under Section 473 of Cr.P.C., to condone the delay in filing the final report and the learned Magistrate, considering the reasons assigned, has allowed the petition and thereby condoned the delay in filing the final report and consequently received the same and cognizance was taken in C.C.No.424 of 2022 and as such, the question of the limitation does not arise at all.

7.The learned Magistrate in the impugned order has also observed about the filing of the petition in Cr.M.P.No.4836 of 2022 to condone the delay and the order passed by the learned Magistrate condoning the delay. Whatever it is, it is pertinent to note that the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mrs.Sarah Mathew Vs. The Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases by its Director – Dr. K.M. Cherian & Ors., reported in 2014 2 SCC 62 and the case in Amritlal vs. Shantilal Soni & Others reported in 2022 Livelaw SC 248, has held that for the purposes of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 Cr.P.C., the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of the prosecution and not the date on which a Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence.

8. It is necessary to refer the decision of this Court in Abiganesh Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by The Inspecto