Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 34 (0.27 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 473 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 15 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Bharat Damodar Kale & Anr vs State Of A.P on 8 October, 2003
14. The observations made in the case of Bharat Damodar Kale, (supra) that the limitation prescribed under Chapter XXXVI of the Code is only for filing of the complaint or initiation of prosecution and not for taking cognizance, are as follows :-
Japani Sahoo vs Chandra Sekhar Mohanty on 27 July, 2007
13. It would also be apposite to refer to the decisions in the case of Bharat Damodar Kale Vs. State of A.P.3, and also in the case of Japani Sahoo Vs. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty4, which were held to have laid down the correct law in the aforementioned decision of the Constitution Bench in the case of Sarah Mathew.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Sarah Mathew vs Inst., Cardio Vascular Diseases & Ors on 26 November, 2013
8. We have considered the aforesaid contention advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellant. It is apparent from the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, that he is calculating limitation by extending the same to the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nalagarh, on 06.02.2009. The instant contention is wholly misconceived on account of the legal position declared by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Sarah Mathew vs. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases, wherein in para 51, this Court has held as under : (SCC p.102)
"51. In view of the above, we hold that for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 CrPC 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. We further hold that Bharat Kale which is followed in Japani Sahoo lays down the correct law. Krishna Pillai will have to be restricted to its own facts and it is not the authority for deciding the question as to what is the relevant date for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468 CrPC."