The Bombay High Court has held that the limitation period under Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for prosecuting offences under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) begins from the last act of cruelty.
A division bench comprising Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Rohit Joshi clarified that while Section 498-A is a continuing offence, each act of cruelty provides a fresh starting point for the limitation period. However, this limitation does not extend indefinitely, as such an interpretation would render Section 468 of the CrPC ineffective. The court emphasized that if the legislature intended to exempt Section 498-A from the purview of Section 468, it would have explicitly provided for the same.
The bench was hearing a petition seeking to quash an FIR filed in January 2023 based on an alleged act of cruelty that occurred in October 2019. While the court quashed the FIR against the husband’s family members due to vague and omnibus allegations, it refused to quash the FIR against the husband.
The husband argued that since the offence under Section 498-A carries a maximum sentence of three years, the limitation period for taking cognizance should also be three years. Given that the FIR was lodged beyond this period, he contended that the prosecution was time-barred.
However, the court upheld the prosecution’s argument that Sections 468 and 473 of the CrPC allow for an extension of the limitation period if the delay is adequately explained or if taking cognizance serves the interests of justice. The bench also took into account the COVID-19 pandemic and the Supreme Court’s orders extending limitation periods.
Considering the allegations of dowry-related ill-treatment and the minimal delay in filing the complaint, the court ruled that the limitation period should be extended under Section 473 of the CrPC. Consequently, it declined to quash the FIR against the husband.
Case Title: Musin Thengade v. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 887 of 2023).
