https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112534 A criminal complaint alleging misstatements in a prospectus was treated as time-barred because the alleged offences carried a limitation period of three years under criminal procedure law. The plea to exclude the period spent in obtaining sanction failed since the complaint did not plead when sanction was sought, when it was granted, or any facts showing lawful exclusion of delay. The court applied the principle that limitation must be examined before cognizance, and a prosecution that is prima facie barred cannot proceed unless the delay is properly explained and legally condoned at the pre-cognizance stage. The complaint was therefore held unsustainable. en-us Mon, 25 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Nov 2014 20:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112534 A criminal complaint alleging misstatements in a prospectus was treated as time-barred because the alleged offences carried a limitation period of three years under criminal procedure law. The plea to exclude the period spent in obtaining sanction failed since the complaint did not plead when sanction was sought, when it was granted, or any facts showing lawful exclusion of delay. The court applied the principle that limitation must be examined before cognizance, and a prosecution that is prima facie barred cannot proceed unless the delay is properly explained and legally condoned at the pre-cognizance stage. The complaint was therefore held unsustainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 25 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112534