Relevant Date To Compute Limitation Period U/S 468 CrPC Is The Date Of Institution Of Prosecution: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the relevant date for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 CrPC is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of prosecution and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence.

It may be noted that 'institution of prosecution' would refer to the date of filing of the complaint or registering of the FIR [vide Darshan Singh Saini Vs. Sohan Singh and another (2015) 14 SCC 570 & Johnson Alexander Vs. State by CBI Cri. Appeal 1478 of 2010]

It was specifically observed by the bench of Justice Sameer Jain that the relevant date for the purpose of 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 and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance.

Case

Essemtially, one Jai Krishna Dubey had moved the Court for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings intitiated against him under Sections 147, 148, 336, 332, 353, 504, 506 I.P.C.pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur.

The application was moved on the sole ground that cognizance order passed by court below was time barred and therefore proceedings pending against applicants were bad. It was submitted that the cognizance was taken by the court on January 27, 2021, after more than three years from the date of incident (June 10, 2017).

He further submitted that charge sheet against the applicants had been filed under Sections 147, 148, 336, 332, 353 & 506 I.P.C. and none of the offence is punishable with imprisonment more than three years and therefore, by virtue of Section 468 Cr.P.C., after three years of the incident, cognizance cannot be taken by the court below.

On the other hand, the Counsel for the state argued that the incident occured on June 10, 2017 and F.I.R. was lodged the next day, therefore, it cannot be said that cognizance taken by the court below was time barred as F.I.R. of the present case was lodged well within three years from the date of the incident.

Court's order

Persuing section 468 of CrPC, the Court noted that as per the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Sarah Mathew Vs. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases (2014) 2 SCC 62, the relevant date for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 Cr.P.C. was the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of prosecution and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance.

"In the present case as the date of commission of offence is 10.06.2017 and F.I.R. was lodged on 11.06.2017 i.e., next date. Therefore, the date of institution of prosecution in the present matter is 11.06.2017 i.e., the date on which F.I.R. was lodged, therefore, in view of the Constitution Bench Judgment of the Apex Court in case of Sarah Mathew (Supra), it cannot be said that the cognizance taken by the court below on 27.01.2021 is time barred as prosecution was instituted well within time on 11.06.2017," the Court observed as it dismissed the plea.

Case title - Jai Krishna Dubey@ Raj Dubey And 4 Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION US 482 No. - 11167 of 2022]

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 340

Click Here To Read/Download Order