NAWAL KISHORE BIRLA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the parties were heard in detail at this stage itself and, as such, this application is being disposed of finally with the consent of the parties.

(2.) THE petitioners have prayed for quashing of the prosecution of the petitioners for the offence under Sec.33 of the Indian Forest Act and Sections 2, 3(A), (B) of the Forest Conservation Act.

(3.) MR . Bajaj, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the cognizance taken for the said offences on 29.10.2002 was barred by the limitation as envisaged under Sec. 468(2) of the Cr PC. He further submitted that the maximum punishment provided under Sec.33 of the Indian Forest Act is six months imprisonment and the maximum punishment provided under Section 3(A), (B) of the Forest Conservation Act, is simple imprisonment which may extend for a period of 15 days, therefore, the cognizance for the said offences could have been taken within a period of one year from the date of the commission of the offence alleged. It is further submitted that in the present case admittedly the date of alleged occurrence is said to be 20.5.1998 and the cognizance was taken on 29.10.2002, i.e. much after the period of limitation of one year prescribed under Sec. 468(2) of the Cr PC. Therefore, the order taking cognizance as well as the entire prosecution is liable to be quashed.