The Limitation Period in CrPC 468: A Matter of Interpretation
crpc_bnss clat_ug intermediate discussionIs the limitation period in CrPC 468 a must or a mere suggestion? I strongly believe it's a must. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Sajeevan (1996) clearly stated that the court shall not take cognizance of an offence after the expiry of the limitation period. But what about situations like Rupa Hurra (2002) where the court held that the limitation period will start only after the police report is filed?
I think it's time we revisit the interpretation of CrPC 468. The police and prosecution must act within the specified time frame to ensure the victim gets justice. If not, the accused gets acquitted due to the limitation period. Is this fair? Shouldn't the limitation period be made more stringent? What's your take, friends?
CrPC 468's limitation period is often misunderstood. It's not just about 90 days for lodging an FIR. The key lies in the 'accused person absconding' part. If the accused is on the run, the clock doesn't start ticking. But if they're in custody, the 90-day window begins. This interpretation issue needs clarity. It can lead to delays in justice delivery or even acquittals due to technicalities. Lawyers and judges need to be mindful of this subtlety.