COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL OFFICER Vs. VECHANKI ANASUYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Commissioner and Special Officer, Machilipatnam Municipality is the petitioner herein. The respondent accused was prosecuted for offences punishable under Section 340 read with 228 of the A. P. Municipalities Act. The trial Court convicted the respondent-accused and sentenced her to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The respondent-accused preferred an appeal and the appellate Court allowed the appeal and acquitted her, holding that the prosecution is barred by limitation.

(2.) Before the trial court it was contended on behalf of the Municipality that the prosecution is not barred by limitation as it is within six months as provided under section 468 (3) Cr. P. C. Before the appellate Court it was contended on behalf of the accused that there is a special provision in section 366 of the A. P. Municipalities Act prescribing limitation and that when there is a special enactment the provisions of Cr. P.C. cannot be applied The learned Sessions Judge accepted this contention and held that the prosecution is barred by limitation, inasmuch as it was launched beyond three months as provided in section 366 of the A. P. Municipalities Act.

(3.) In this revision case Sri D. Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the Municipality submits that the lower appellate Court has over-looked the proviso to section 366 and since in the instant case the offence committed is continuing one the prosecution could be launched within one year as provided under the proviso. Section 366 reads thus :