SANTHOSH KUMAR Vs. SYAMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Annexure A3 order passed by the Grama Nyayalaya, Perinad, condoning the delay in taking cognizance of the offences against the petitioner is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.

(2.) The petitioner is the 5th accused in S.T.No.1971/2017 on the files of the Grama Nyayalaya, Perinad. The offences alleged against him are punishable under Ss. 323 and 341, read with Sec. 34 of the IPC. The prosecution allegation, in short, is that on 27/1/2013, the petitioner, along with the remaining accused, wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and caused him bodily injury and thereby committed the offences.

(3.) The alleged incident took place on 27/1/2013. The final report was filed on 17/11/2016. As per Sec. 468(1) of Cr.P.C, no court shall take cognizance of an offence of the category specified in sub-sec. (2), after the period of limitation. As per sub-sec. 2(b), if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, the period of limitation is one year. The punishment prescribed for the offence under Sec. 323 of IPC is simple imprisonment for one year and for the offence under Sec. 341 of IPC is simple imprisonment for one month. No application has been filed by the investigating agency along with the final report to condone the delay. The petitioner appeared before the trial court and filed an application as CMP No.735 of 2018 to stop the proceedings under Sec. 258 of the Cr.P.C on the ground that taking cognizance of the offence was barred by limitation under Sec. 468 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the prosecutor filed an application under Sec. 473 of Cr.P.C to condone the delay. The application was opposed by the petitioner. However, it was allowed as per Annexure A3. The said order is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.