https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299490 The Bombay HC held that, where an appeal against acquittal is governed by a special limitation period under the Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 2 to 24 of the Limitation Act, 1963 apply unless expressly excluded; accordingly, delay could be condoned under s. 5 and the maintainability objection failed. It further held that once a complaint has properly proceeded as a warrant case and charge has been framed, the Magistrate cannot switch to summons-case procedure and dismiss it for non-prosecution merely because the charge is later triable as a summons case. The dismissal was therefore illegal, the order was set aside, and the matter was remitted for disposal from the stage of dismissal. en-us Mon, 04 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Dec 2021 14:25:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299490 The Bombay HC held that, where an appeal against acquittal is governed by a special limitation period under the Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 2 to 24 of the Limitation Act, 1963 apply unless expressly excluded; accordingly, delay could be condoned under s. 5 and the maintainability objection failed. It further held that once a complaint has properly proceeded as a warrant case and charge has been framed, the Magistrate cannot switch to summons-case procedure and dismiss it for non-prosecution merely because the charge is later triable as a summons case. The dismissal was therefore illegal, the order was set aside, and the matter was remitted for disposal from the stage of dismissal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299490