State Of Punjab vs Sarwan Singh on 2 April, 1981
"It is true that the object of introducing Section 468 was to
put a bar of limitation on prosecutions and to prevent the
parties from filing cases after a long time, as it was thought
proper that after a long lapse of time, launching of
prosecution may be vexatious, because by that time even
the evidence may disappear. This aspect has been
mentioned in the statement and object, for introducing a
period of limitation, as well as by this Court in the case of
Sarwan Singh (supra). But, that consideration cannot be
extended to matrimonial offences, where the allegations are
of cruelty, torture and assault by the husband or other
members of the family to the complainant. It is a matter of
common experience that victim is subjected to such cruelty
repeatedly and it is more or less like a continuing offence.
It is only as a last resort that a wife openly comes before a
court to unfold and relate the day-to-day torture and cruelty
faced by her, inside the house, which many of such victims
do not like to be made public. As such, courts while
561-A no.41/2008 Page 31 of 37
considering the question of limitation for an offence under
Section 498-A i.e. subjecting a woman to cruelty by her
husband or the relative of her husband, should judge that
question, in the light of Section 473 of the Code, which
requires the Court, not only to examine as to whether the
delay has been properly explained, but as to whether it is
necessary to do so in the interests of justice."