MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. JAIWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Municipal Council, Thanesar has filed the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 13.7.2000 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra vide which the accused respondent was discharged and the complaint filed by the petitioner against her was dismissed being barred by time; and the revision filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 21.9.2002.

(2.) The petitioner-Municipal Council filed a complaint against the respondent under Sections 208/209 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by alleging that the respondent accused raised construction of one room and a kitchen without obtaining sanction from it, whereupon a notice dated 15.9.1995 was issued to her. The respondent did not comply with the said notice. The aforesaid complaint was filed against her on 19.3.1997 after lapse of the period of more than one year. The Trial Court dismissed the said complaint and discharged the accused by holding that under Section 209 of the Act, the accused who failed to comply with the terms of the notice issued to her under Section 208 of the Act, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term up to six months or with a fine which shall not be less than one thousand rupees and more than five thousand rupees or both.

(3.) Section 468 Cr.P.C. creates a bar for taking cognizance of the offence after the lapse of the period of limitation. It provides that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence of the category specified in Sub-section (2), after the expiry of the period of limitation. Sub-section (2) of Section 468 Cr.P.C. provides the period of limitation which shall be as under:-