P A RAMI REDDY Vs. TAHSILDAR BANGANAPALLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision case is against the order holding that the complaint is not barred by limitation under S. 468, Cr.P.C. The petitioner is charged with an offence punishable under S. 24(1) of the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 for furnishing a declaration omitting Ac. 7.54 cents of land. The petitioner took the plea before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Banaganapalle that the complaint is barred by limitation under S. 468, Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate held that the period of limitation has to be computed from 13-12-1979 the date of the order passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal and negatived the contention.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the date on which the order was passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal is not the relevant date for computing the period of limitation but the relevant date is as provided under Ss. 468 and 469, Cr.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor contends that the heirarchy of authorities are seized of the matter under Land Reforms Act and the prosecution launched with reference to the failure to file a declaration is subject to the final order passed by the tribunal and as such the period has to be computed from the date of the Order of the tribunal.

(3.) To appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to get at S. 468, Cr.P.C. which is as follows :-