Sunil kumar @ Sunil Kumar Kandhway vs The State of Bihar and Arjun Prasad

Sheema Ali Khan, J.—The Petitioner has filed this quashing application challenging the order dated 12.07.2006 passed in Protest -cum- Complaint Case No. 293 of 2002 (Trial No. 898 of 2006) by which the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 341 and 323 on the ground that it is barred by Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The occurrence is said to have taken place on 23.04.1999 whereas cognizance for the offence has been taken on 12.07.2006. Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure takes into account the period of limitation for taking cognizance. The offences u/s 341 of the Indian Penal Code is punishable with the Simple Imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or fine, which may extend to Rs. 500/- or in both. Similarly, Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.

Section 348 of the Indian Penal Code explains the period of limitation which comes within Sub-clause (b)of Clause 2 of Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which prescribe the limitation of one year for the offences punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.

In the circumstances, I quash the order dated 12.07.2006 passed in Protest -cum- Complaint Case No. 293 of 2002 (Trial No. 898 of 2006) pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya.

This application is thus allowed.