Supreme Court of India
Roma Ahuja v. The State
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
What the Court ordered
We hold that for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 Cr.PC the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of institution of prosecution and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance.
Judgment, page 16
From the headnote
Issue for Consideration What would be the relevant date for computation of the period of limitation, whether it is the date when the criminal complaint is filed or the date when the Court/Magistrate takes cognizance. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.468 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.323, 341 r/w. s.34 – Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation – High Court quashed the FIR on the ground of limitation holding that the date of taking cognizance by the Magistrate is relevant and as cognizance was taken after a period of one year, the bar of limitation u/s.468 was
Authorities it was built on
- 2008 S.K. Sinha, Chief Enforcement Officer v. Mis. Videocon International Ltd. & Ors.
- 2013 Mrs. Sarah Mathew v. The Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases by its Director - Dr. K.M. Cherian & Ors.
- 2007 Japani Sahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty
- 1993 Smt. Vanka Radhamanohari v. Vanke Venkata Reddy and Ors.
- 2022 Amritlal v. Shantilal Soni & Ors.
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.