Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Mahabir
1987 Latest Caselaw 501 Del

JUDGMENT

Charanjit Talwar, J.

(1) A preliminary objection taken on behalf of the respondents in these six appeals is that these are barred by limitation. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short the Corporation) had filed six complaints against the respondents for an offence under Section 332 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.)

(2) After trial the respondents in each case were acquitted. The Corporation at that time was of the view that the applications seeking special leave to appeal from the orders of acquittal could be filed within six months computed from the date of order of acquittal. The preliminary objection taken is that the limitation provided under Section 378(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for filing an application seeking special leave is sixty days and thus the appeals are barred by limlitation. The said sub-section reads as follows: "5.No application under Sub-Section (4) for the grant of special leave to appeal from an order of acquittal shall be entertained by the High Court after the expiry of six months where the complainant is a public servant and 60 days in every other case computed from the date of that order of acquittal."

(3) As we have noticed, the complaints were filed by the Corporation. The fact is not being disputed by the counsel for the appellant. On a bare reading of the above quoted provision it is to be held that the applications in each of the above cases were to be filed within sixty days of the order of acquittal.

(4) In Cr. Appeal No. 264 of 1984 filed by the Corporation against Shri Mahabir. the period of limitation expired on 22nd August, 1984. In Crl. Appeal No. 265/84 filed against Shri Mahabir, the period of limitation expired on 24th August, 1984. In Crl. Appeal No. 266/84, the period of limitation expired on 22nd August, 1984. The respondent in this case was Shri Govind. In Crl. Appeal No. 267/84 filed against Shri Govind. the period of limitation expired on 22nd August, 1984. In the 5th and 6th appeals, i.e., Crl. Appeals 264/84 & 269/84 filed against this very respondent, i.e., Shri Govind, the period of limitation expired on 31st August, 1984. All the above appeals were, however, filed on 19th October, 1984.

(5) In view of the above admitted facts, the preliminary objection is to be upheld. All the six appeals were filed beyond the period of limitation and thus are liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly. .