DEENA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the accused in C. C. No. 513/83 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Vth Court, Bangalore, One Sri. B.N. Prabhakar Rao, a police constable No. 2898 attached to Ulsoor police station who is the neighbour of the accused filed a complaint in the Ulsoor police station on 17 -8 -79 alleging that on that day at 1.55 p.m. while he was, proceeding to bis house, the accused wrongfully restrained him and assaulted him with chappals and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 341 and 355 IPC. After completing the investigation, the charge -sheet was filed in the Court -below against the accused on 14 -3 -1983 ie., after more than 3 1/2 years from the date of offence.

(2.) ACCORDING to Section 468(2)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') the charge -sheet ought to have been filed within three years from the date of offence as the offence under Section 355 IPC is punishable with imprisonment for two years or with fine, or with both. Therefore, the Counsel for the accused contended that the prosecution was barred by Section 468 (2)(c) of the Code.

(3.) IN considering the scope and object of Section 468 of the Code, in State of Punjab v. Sarwan Singh 1981 Crl. L.J 722 the Supreme Court was pleased to observe thus : "The object of Criminal Procedure Code in putting a bar of limitation on prosecutions was clearly to prevent the parties from filing cases after a long time, as a result of which material evidence may disappear and also to prevent abuse of the process of the Court by filing vexatious and belated prosecutions long after the date of the offence. The object which the statute seeks to subserve is clearly in consonance with the concept of fairness of trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. It is therefore, of the utmost importance that any prosecution, whether by the State or a private complainant must abide by the letter of law or take the risk of the prosecution failing on the ground of limitation...."