Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2015 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 21 - SC - Indian LawsPeriod of Limitation under provisions of Section 468 Cr. P.C.- Legal maxim, nullum tempus aut locus occurrit regi ((lapse of time is no bar to the Crown for the purpose of it initiating proceeding against offenders) - Continuing Offence - Held that:- The law of limitation prescribed under the Cr.P.C., must be observed, but in certain exceptional circumstances, taking into consideration the gravity of the charge, the Court may condone delay, recording reasons for the same, in the event that it is found necessary to condone such delay in the interest of justice. In the case of a continuing offence, the ingredients of the offence continue, i.e., endure even after the period of consummation, whereas in an instantaneous offence, the offence takes place once and for all i.e. when the same actually takes place. In such cases, there is no continuing offence, even though the damage resulting from the injury may itself continue. The same view was held in Balakrishna Savalram Pujari Waghmare & Ors. [1959 (3) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT]. The instant appeals are squarely covered by the observations made in Kishan Singh [2010 (8) TMI 888 - SUPREME COURT] and thus, the proceedings must be labeled as nothing more than an abuse of the process of the court, particularly in view of the fact that, with respect to enact the same subject matter, various complaint cases had already been filed by respondent No.2 and his brother, which were all dismissed on merits, after the examination of witnesses. In such a fact-situation, Complaint Case No. 628 of 2011, filed on 31.5.2001 was not maintainable. Thus, the Magistrate concerned committed a grave error by entertaining the said case, and wrongly took cognizance and issued summons to the appellants. - Decided in favour of appellants.
|