STATE Vs. KAKANI ATCHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two criminal appeals came up before mis Bench on a reference made by our learned brother, M. Ranga Reddy, J. on the following questions, viz., (1) whether the provisions of Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure bar the court from taking cognizance of an offence beyond the period of limitation even in cases where the complaint has been filed within the period limitation; and (2) in cases where a complaint or a charge sheet is returned with some objections and is represented later, whether the court taking cognizance of the offence is to take the date of presentation or the date of representation for computing the period of limitation.

(2.) The very same points have come up for reference before this Bench in and this Bench has answered the points in Crl. R.C.No. 632 of 1991 dated 23-2-1993 holding that whenever a complaint or a charge-sheet is filed, the court must first see whether it is within the peroid of limitation with reference to Section 468 Cr.P.C. duly taking into account the original date of filing of the complaint/ charge-sheet in the court in the first instance but not with reference to the date of taking cognizance. But if the complaint/charge-sheet is found to be not within the period of limitation, the court should not register the case but give an opportunity to the person or to the Police Officer who filed the complaint or charge-sheet, as the case may be, to satisfy on the question of limitation for purposes of condonation of delay. As regards the condonation of delay, it should not be done as a matter of course. The delay has to be condoned with exercise of judicial discretion. Section 473 Cr.P.C. should also be liberally construed. It was further observed in the said order that principles of natural justice demand that the accused persons must be heard before passing an order on the application filed under Section 473 Cr.P.C. as such an order is bound to affect a valuable right which accures to the accused. It was also observed that if the complaint/charge-sheet is filed within the period of limitation, the court has got power to return the same for complying with the defects pointed out by it. Even if the complaint/charge-sheet is represented after complying with the defects/objections pointed out by the court within the time granted by the court and if that date falls beyond the period of limitation, still the court has to take cognizance of the case by duly taking into account the original date of filing of the complaint/charge-sheet filed in the first instance as the limitation prescribed under Section 468 Cr.P.C. is to be reckoned with reference to the date of filing of the complaint/charge-sheet in the court in the first instance but not with reference to the date of taking cognizance.

(3.) The present two criminal appeals are squarely covered by the above order made by us in Crl.R.C.No. 632/91 dated 23-2-1993.