Court Barred U/S 468(2)(c) CrPC From Taking Cognizance If Charge Sheet For Offence With 3 Yrs Punishment Not Filed In 3 Yrs Of Incident: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court has said that Section 468(2)(c) of CrPC specifies that no court shall take cognizance of the offences punishable with imprisonment for a period of three years after the expiry of three years from the date of alleged incident. A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar while allowing the petition filed by one Karan Menon said, "In the present case, the alleged incident was taken place in the year 2014 and the FIR was lodged on 07.06.2017 and till date the final report has not been submitted by the police. Hence, in view of the bar contained in Section 468(2)C of Cr.P.C., the registration of FIR requires to be quashed." The FIR was lodged by the second respondent alleging that the petitioner-accused used to talk to her online and harass and threatened her by sending nude messages to her and family members. The police registered FIR for the offences punishable under Section 43A, 67, 66D, 66E, 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and under Section 354(D) of IPC. It was submitted by the petitioner's counsel that the offences alleged against the petitioner accused are punishable with imprisonment for three years and with fine and the final report has not been filed by the police even after lapse of more than five years from the date of alleged incident. The cognizance cannot be taken by the Magistrate after three years from the date of offences as specified under Section 468(2)(c) of the CrPC. The prosecution opposed the plea saying the allegations made in the FIR discloses the commission of cognizable offence and the allegations required to be investigated and at this stage the registration of the FIR cannot be interfered with. Court findings: The bench said, "Section 468(2)(c) of Cr.P.C specifies that no Court shall take cognizance of the offences punishable with imprisonment for a period of three years after the expiry of three years from the date of alleged incident." Further it observed, "The alleged incident has taken place in the year 2014 and the FIR was lodged on 07.06.2017 without offering any plausible explanation. Hence, it is implied that the FIR lodged was with ulterior motive to wreak vengeance the petitioner-accused and with revengeful intent." Accordingly it allowed the petition. Case Title: KARAN MENON v. STATE OF KARNATAKA Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.9334 OF 2018 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 263 Date of OrdeR: 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022 Appearance: Advocate N.PADMAVATHI for petitioner; HCGP S VISHWAMURTHY for R1 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Court Barred U/S 468(2)(c) CrPC From Taking Cognizance If Charge Sheet For Offence With 3 Yrs Punishment Not Filed In 3 Yrs Of Incident: Karnataka HC

Mustafa Plumber

Tags