The limitations on taking cognizance of certain offenses in India are outlined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 468 of the CrPC specifies the period of limitation for initiating proceedings against an accused. These limitations are important to ensure that cases are filed within a reasonable time and to prevent delayed and stale cases from being brought before the courts.

1. General Limitation: The general rule is that no court can take cognizance of an offense after the lapse of the specified period of limitation. The period of limitation varies depending on the severity of the offense.
2. Types of Offences: The limitations are categorized based on the nature of the offense:

• Summary Offences: These are less serious offenses that typically have a shorter limitation period.
• Non-Summary Offences: These are more serious offenses that often have longer limitation periods.

Limitation Period: The limitation period varies according to the offense. For example:

• Offenses punishable with a fine only or with imprisonment for up to six months have a limitation period of six months.
• For offenses punishable with imprisonment for more than six months but less than two years, the limitation period is one year.
• Offenses punishable with imprisonment for more than two years have a limitation period of three years.
• In some cases, there may be no specific limitation period, particularly for more severe offenses.

1. Date of Accrual: The limitation period begins to run from the date when the offense was committed.
2. Exclusions: Some offenses are exempt from these limitation periods, meaning they can be prosecuted at any time. These include offenses against women, such as rape, dowry death, and certain sexual offenses.
3. Extension of Limitation: In certain situations, the court may allow an extension of the limitation period if the delay is due to factors like the accused’s absconding or attempts to evade justice. This extension is not automatic and is granted at the court’s discretion.
4. Effect on Prosecution: If a case is filed after the expiration of the limitation period, the court is likely to reject it. However, there can be exceptions if the delay is adequately explained or if the offense falls under one of the exempt categories.

Non- Applicability of Section 468

In the case of Nirmal Kanti Roy vs State of West Bengal, (1998) Cr LJ 3282 (SC), the Supreme  Court held that Section 468 is not applicable to an offence under Section 7 (1) (A) (ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

In the Case of State of Himachal Pradesh  vs Tara Dutta, AIR 2000 SC 297, the Court held:

“ the language of subsection (3) of section 468 gives a clear view that  period of limitation that is provided under in Section 468 is in pursuance of the alleged offence charged but it is not used in respect of offence which is finally proved.”

In the case of Venkappa Gurappa Hosur vs Kasawwa (1997), the Court held that:

“ once the period of limitation begins to continue, it continues its full course.”

Section 469: Beginning of period of limitation

The period of limitation commences from the following points:

• On the day when the offence was committed
• When the person aggrieved by the act had no knowledge regarding the commission the offence or the police officer; it begins on the day when it comes to the knowledge of the aggrieved party or police making an investigation into the case whichever is earlier.
• When the person who has committed an act is unknown or not being identified, the first date on which the accused was known either to the aggrieved person or to the police officer making an investigation into the case whichever is earlier.

The day from which such period of limitation begins shall be excluded for the purpose of this Chapter. It means that the first day from which the period of limitation begins to be calculated shall not be included while computing the period of limitation. Let us understand from the example:

The offence punishable only with the fine was committed on 1st May 2019. The period of limitation begins from 2nd May 2019 and not from 1st May 2019.

In the case of State of Rajasthan vs Sanjay Kumar,1998 Cri LJ 256 (SC), the Court stated that the period of limitation will not commence from the date when the sample was taken but from the date when the report of Public Analysts was received in case of adulteration.

Section 470: Exclusion of Time in certain cases

This section provides the period which shall not be included in computing the period of limitation.

The period of limitation that is to be excluded in computing the period of limitation is explained below:

• The time during which such person is prosecuting another prosecution with due diligence whether it is a court of Appeal, or in the Court of the first instance against the offender.

Such period will not be excluded unless another prosecution is related to the same circumstances or the facts of the case for which the previous prosecution has been initiated or the court in which the previous proceeding has been being is unable to entertain the case due to lack of jurisdiction.

• In the case where the institution of proceeding is stayed by the order or injunction, the time shall exclude:

1. The period during the continuance of such order or injunction.
2. The day on which it was made or was issued.
3. The day on which it was withdrawn.

• In a case where the notice of prosecution of offence is given or the previous consent or the sanction of the Government is mandatory under this law or any other law for the time being in force the time during which:-

1. The period of notice or;
2. The period for obtaining the consent or sanction of the Government shall be excluded.
3. It also specifies that the time which is required for taking the sanction or the permission from the Government or any other authority -The date on which the application was made for taking the consent or sanction and ;

The date on which the permission or the consent was granted shall be excluded.

• In computing the period of limitation such period is to be excluded

1. The time during which the offender is absent from India or from any territory which is outside from India but is under the administration of Central Government.
2. The time during which the offender has avoided arrest either by concealing himself or either by absconding.

Section 471: Exclusion of date on which court is closed:

The day when the Court is closed is excluded from being accredited to the specified period of limitation.

It is a rule that in the case when the period of limitation expires on the day of the closure of court proceedings the cognizance of an offence is taken when the court reopens.  

When the court closes on normal working hours for a particular period it is presumed that the Court has been closed for the same day.

Section 472: When the offence continues:

When the offences continue or are in the process of happening; fresh limitation begins to run at every moment, the offence is replicated throughout the full term that it continues.

Section 473: Extension of Period in Certain Cases:

• This section is the pivotal section as it focuses on administering justice. It gives a chance to the complainant or the aggrieved person to institute the suit even after the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation.
• In normal circumstances, the case is not to be instituted after the expiry of the prescribed period but in exceptional circumstances, the court allows for the institution of the suit.

Discretion of the Court

It is the discretion of the Court to extend the period of limitation. This section does not mandate the court to extend the period of limitation.

Conditions:

• When the court is satisfied with the facts and circumstances of the case that complainant was prevented by sufficient cause from not appearing before the Court within the prescribed period of limitation.
• The cause of the delay is properly explained and the court is satisfied with it.
• The court is of the opinion that it is necessary to extend the period in the interest of justice.

The same provision is also explained in the Limitation Act.

The Limitation Act

Section 5: Extension of the period in Certain Cases

Even in the civil case, the court has a discretionary power to extend the period of limitation when the court is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not appearing within the prescribed period or that the cause of the reason was sufficiently explained or that it is necessary to do in the interest of justice.

State of Himachal Pradesh vs Tara Dutta AIR 2000 SC 1729

The Court held that:

“when the provision is being invoked by the Magistrate, and it condones the delay then the order of Magistrate must show that the delay was properly explained to him and it was necessary for the condonation of delay in the interest of justice”.

 Srinivas Pal vs Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh SC 1729,

the Court held that: It is not mandatory to determine whether the extension of the period of limitation under Section 473 must precede of taking the cognizance of the offence.”

Conclusion

With the passage of time, the evidence deteriorates, the accused may become unidentified, the circumstances might be changed. So the suit may be brought within the specified period so that the lawyers can find the evidence, the situation of the accused does not change. It was not possible to bring the suit within the appropriate time so for this purpose Chapter, XXXVI was enacted. It is not brought to extinguish the rights of the person but it is brought to avoid the unnecessary delay in instituting a suit.