Criminal limitation and cognizance: Section 473 permits delay relief where justice requires, so quashing on limitation was unwarranted.

Chapter XXXVI CrPC does not operate like civil limitation, because Section 473 allows cognizance after the prescribed period where delay is properly explained or where taking cognizance is necessary in the interests of justice. In complaints alleging cruelty by a husband or relatives, the court must assess delay with sensitivity to the repeated or continuing nature of the grievance. An allegation of a second marriage also disclosed an offence carrying a longer punishment, so the Section 468 bar was not applied as the High Court assumed. The High Court was therefore not justified in quashing the proceedings on limitation grounds, and the matter was to proceed in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint alleging cruelty by the husband and a second marriage was liable to be quashed as barred by limitation under the Code of Criminal Procedure, and whether cognizance could still be taken in view of the power to extend limitation in the interests of justice.

Analysis: The limitation scheme in Chapter XXXVI of the Code does not operate in the same manner as the civil law of limitation. Section 473 confers an overriding power on the Court to take cognizance after expiry of the prescribed period if the delay is properly explained or if taking cognizance is necessary in the interests of justice. In cases alleging cruelty by a husband or his relatives, the grievance is often of a repeated and continuing nature, and the Court must examine the question of delay with sensitivity to the nature of the offence and the background of the victim. The allegation of a second marriage also disclosed an offence punishable with a longer term of imprisonment, to which the bar of Section 468 did not apply in the manner assumed by the High Court.

Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in quashing the proceedings on the ground of limitation. Cognizance could be taken, and the matter was required to proceed in accordance with law.

---