Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 44441
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Vijayakumar, J
Anandhan – Appellant
Versus
Inspector of Police – Respondent
Crl.O.P(MD)No.8114 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Arjun
For the Respondents: Thanga Aravindh. B
A criminal proceeding, specifically an FIR, is liable to be quashed if a charge sheet is not filed within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as continuing such proceedings would constitute an abuse of the process of law.
Headnote:The petitioner sought to quash an FIR registered under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on the ground that no charge sheet had been filed for over three years, thereby exceeding the period of limitation prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court observed that the delay in filing the charge sheet rendered the criminal proceedings an abuse of the process of law due to the bar on cognizance as per the statutory limitation period. The Court held that maintaining the proceedings beyond the limitation period to take cognizance was unsustainable. The core issue was whether criminal proceedings should be quashed when the limitation period for taking cognizance under Section 468 of the Cr.P.C. has expired without the filing of a charge sheet. The Court reasoned that the statutory bar on cognizance of an offence after the expiry of the prescribed limitation period precludes the continuation of such proceedings, as it results in an abuse of the court's process. The Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR, granting liberty to the petitioner to move the trial court for the return of his vehicle.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegation of theft of sand by a vehicle operator. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. limitation period for filing charge sheets effectively terminates criminal proceedings. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. quashing of stale proceedings and liberty for vehicle retrieval. (Para 7) |
ORDER
The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed by A2 in Crime No. 235 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police station, wherein, the petitioner is alleged to have committed offence under Section 379 of IPC. The FIR has been registered on 15.07.2022.
2. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the petitioner is a JCB driver and he is said to have committed theft of half unit of gravel sand.
3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, so far charge sheet has not been laid. Therefore, the same is barred under Section
468 of Cr.P.C.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that so far charge sheet has not been laid in the above said case.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
6. The FIR has been registered on 15.07.2022 under Section 379 of IPC. Admittedly, so far charge sheet has not been filed. In view of Section 468 (2) of Cr.P.C, taking cognizance of the offence has been barred due to limitation. In view of the fact that for the past three years, charge sheet has not been laid, continuing the criminal proceedings as against the petitioner would only be an abuse of process of law.
7. In view of the above said facts, the FIR in Crime No.235 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police is hereby quashed, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned trial Court seeking to return of the vehicle.
