PRAKASH CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. KAUSHAL KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT appears that proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C, were pending between Prakash Chandra Sharma and Babuddin. On 20th Dec. , 1975, Prakash Chandra filed an application informing the Municipal Board that these proceedings were over, and the rasta in dispute had been released. This information was supplied for the purpose of obtaining sanction with respect to which an earlier application was already pending before the Municipal Board. On the same day, viz. 20th Nov. , 1975, the Municipal Board sanctioned the plan submitted by Prakash Chandra. It appears that on 11th Nov. , 1976, Babuddin filed an application and affidavit before the Officer-in-Charge of the Municipal Board that the information which was conveyed by Prakash Chandra regarding the termination of proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. was false and that the same were still pending. On 6th May, 1977, a complaint was filed by the Officer-in-Charge of the Municipal Board, Bulandshahr. The accused was summoned for 2nd June, 1977. He appeared and filed an objection under Section 468 (b), Cr. P. C. on the ground that the period of limitation had already expired and the Court could not take cognizance of the complaint. On 7th Feb. , 1978, the Asstt. District Government Counsel filed an application that the Officer-in-Charge, Municipal Board obtained knowledge of the false information given by Prakash Chandra on 11th Nov. , 1976, when Babuddin filed his application and affidavit before him. If the period of limitation is computed from the date of knowledge, the complaint would be well within one year of such date and the delay in filing the complaint should, therefore, be condoned. The Magistrate on a consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the complaint and discharged the accused on the ground that it had been filed after the expiry of the period of limitation. Aggrieved thereby a revision was filed before the Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr which has been allowed on 2nd June, 1978; hence this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the impugned orders.

(3.) THE question of law which has to be determined in the instant case is whether it is incumbent upon a party to file an application for condonation of the delay along with a time barred complaint, so that he can get the benefit of Section 473, Criminal P. C. Section 468 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has now specified the period of limitation within which a Court can take cognizance of various offences mentioned therein. It bars the taking of cognizance after the expiry of the period of limitation.