https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126668 For the purpose of limitation under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint, not the date on which the Magistrate later takes cognizance. Chapter XXXVI bars cognizance after the prescribed period, but the complainant fulfils the statutory requirement by presenting the complaint within time. Subsequent steps such as examination of witnesses, judicial application of mind, and issuance of process remain within the Court's control and cannot defeat a complaint otherwise filed in time. Applying the principle that an act of court should prejudice no one, the complaint was held to be within limitation. en-us Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Oct 2013 14:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126668 For the purpose of limitation under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint, not the date on which the Magistrate later takes cognizance. Chapter XXXVI bars cognizance after the prescribed period, but the complainant fulfils the statutory requirement by presenting the complaint within time. Subsequent steps such as examination of witnesses, judicial application of mind, and issuance of process remain within the Court's control and cannot defeat a complaint otherwise filed in time. Applying the principle that an act of court should prejudice no one, the complaint was held to be within limitation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126668