Bharat Damodar Kale & Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh1

. it was held by SC that for the

purpose of computing the period of limitation, the relevant

date is the date of filing of complaint or initiating criminal

proceedings and not the date of taking cognizance by a

Magistrate or issuance of a process by court.

2)The object of the criminal law isto punish perpetrators of crime. This is in tune with the well known legal maxim ‘nullum tempus aut locus occurrit regi’,

which means that a crime never dies

3) complaint is not barred by limitation if complaint is filed in time

1) if the IO, medical officer are not traceable and 3 witnesses are not supporting prosecution story then it would be difficult for prosecution to prove case beynd reasonable doubt

2) in addition there is apparent contradiction in statement of complainant and that of doctor .

if complainant was unconscious till 8th morning obviously his statement could not have been recorded on 7th August as alleged by doctor

468 is not attracted to this. It is your statement that the case was filed 15 years ago but came up for hearing now, so there is no delay. It is not wise or even possible to comment on the merits of the case unless the FIR and statements are perused threadbare. Be that as it may, the accused can be convicted on the statements of the complainant and his wife if they are inspiring.

The period of limitation shall be-

six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only;

one year, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year;

three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years.

But this is only when the cognizance itself is not taken:

Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this Code, no Court, shall take cognizance of an offence after the expiry of the period of limitation.

In your case the FIR and charge sheet were already filed duly very long back hence this section may not be applicable to your case.

the statement of the pw 1 is taken on 7th august before 12 o clock in the night. he was assaulted on his head by a iron rod at about 9 o,clock in the night.in his cross examination he is saying that his statement was taken on 8 th august morning till then he was unconscious. the said statement is endorsed by medical officer of his full consciousness and the date is 7 th august.if he is right then prosecution story and the statment is become useless.please expand on this point.

The above contents is a matter of trial and final arguments in the case. The contradictions may be useful to you during the time of final argument and you can highlight the lacuna and the controversial contradictions observed and recorded.

1) untested evidence is no evidence

2)witnesses have to be available for cross examination

3) in your case evidence of doctor would be necessary to prove nature of injuries , treatment given to the complainant etc

If the particular medical officer is not available, any other doctor can depose evidence based on the report and if the court insists on the particular medical office only, then the prosecution may file a petition to dispense with the evidence. This will be a situation advantage to the accused.

His failure to appear in the court goes against the prosecution as it surrounds the prosecution story in suspicion.