9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (4) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 8th April, 1980 by which the respondent Sarwan Singh was acquitted of the charge under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that the respondent-accused was charged under Section 406 of the Penal Code for misappropriating the amounts deposited with him as a cashier of the Tanda Badha Co-operative Society, District Patiala. The challan was pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any of these dates, the prosecution was barred by limitation under Section 468(2)(c) of the Code. In our opinion, the High Court has taken the correct view of the law. 2. Section 468(2)(c) may be extracted thus : Section 468(2)(c) : three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years. 3. Section 469(1)(a) and (6) may b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reme position be accepted, the prosecution would still be barred by limitation under Section 469(b) of the CrPC, 1973. Counsel for the State of Punjab was unable to assail the point of law derived by the High Court regarding the interpretation of Section 468. The object of the Criminal Procedure Code in putting a bar of limitation on prosecutions was clearly to prevent the parties from filing case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come non-est. For these reasons given above, we hold that the point of law regarding the applicability of Section 468 of the CrPC has been correctly decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. This Court has also taken the same view in a number of decisions. The result is that the appeal fails and is dismissed. The respondent will now be discharged from his bail bonds. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
