1982 (1) TMI 208

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Penal Code, has been challenged solely on the ground that the Magistrate took cognizance of the offence beyond the period of limitation. It stands undisputed that offence under Section 500, Indian Penal Code, can attract punishment to the accused up to two years' simple imprisonment and the complaint has to be filed in Court within a period of three years from the date of the commission of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 764, where it has been held that the period of limitation commences from the date when the defamatory matter is publicised. In the instant case, it is the First Information Report dated May 20, 1975, which contained the defamatory material. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contends that from that date the complaint was undisputably beyond the period of limitation. It has further been maint....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntions of the learned Counsel for the parties, it becomes patent that the Magistrate did not apply his mind at all to the question of limitation. This, he had to, at the pre-cognizance stage, which he failed. On his failure to do so, the proceedings become obviously without jurisdiction. Necessarily the sequential orders of summoning the accused-petitioner as also framing the charge against him ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hout any cognizance having been taken thereon. Learned counsel for the respondent says that if the complainant can now satisfy the Court, by giving reasonable explanation for the delay caused, or otherwise if the Court is satisfied that the complaint need be proceeded with in the interest of justice, it should be left open to the Court to do so. To this course, learned Counsel for the petitioner h....