Prudeta
Prudeta
2026 INSC 336
📌 Paras 2-3.6
The appellant filed an FIR alleging offences under Sections 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The incident occurred on 09.05.2011. The charge-sheet was filed on 29.05.2012, over a year after the incident. The Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offences. The accused sought discharge, arguing the cognizance was barred by limitation under Section 468 of the Cr.PC. The trial court and the revisional court dismissed the discharge pleas. However, the High Court quashed the FIR, holding that the charge-sheet filing date was beyond the one-year limitation period prescribed by Section 468(2)(b) Cr.PC.
📌 Para 5
The central issue before the Supreme Court was to determine the relevant date for computing the p
The bench further analyzed the constitutional validity of the impugned provisions and discussed the interpretation of Articles 14 and 21 in light of recent precedents...
Citing the ratio in prior decisions, the court held that the legislative intent was to ensure...
No credit card required · 14-day free trial