Interim Order 12

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CNR No. DLCT01-002520-2024
SC 120/2024
STATE Vs. SADIA KHAN
FIR No. 333/2023
PS (Darya Ganj)
01.09.2026
Present: Sh. Deepak Kumar Jha, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Jitender Shankar, stated to be AR (Asst. Vice
President, legal) of the complainant company.
Deputed IO HC Mahesh Kumar is present.
None for proposed accused Sadia Khan.
A report under the signature of Addl. DCP, Central
District, Delhi received.
No reply has been filed on behalf of proposed
accused to the application for condonation of delay in filing the
chargesheet.
An application has been filed by the IO alongwith
the chargesheet seeking condonation of delay in filing the
chargesheet.
However, at this stage, Ld. Addl. PP for the State
submits that complaint was given to the police by the authorised
officer of the complainant in writing on 24.11.2020 about the
detection of theft of electricity in an inspection conducted by the
employees of the complainant company on 05.03.2020. He
further submits that FIR in the present case was registered by the
police on 20.07.2023 and upon completion of investigation, IO
has filed chargesheet / final report before the Court on
20.02.2024 for offence u/s 135 of the Electricity Act. He further
Contd...2/-
-- 1 of 4 --
-2-
submits that the relevant date for computing limitation u/s 468
Cr.PC (corresponding to section 514 of BNSS) is the date of
filing of the complaint/date of initiation of criminal proceedings,
and not the date of filing of the chargesheet or the date on which
cognizance is taken by the Court. He further submits that since
the complaint was given to the police within the prescribed
period of limitation i.e. three years, hence, the subsequent filing
of the final report / chargesheet by the IO on 20.02.2024, does
not attract the bar u/s 468 Cr.PC (corresponding to section 514 of
BNSS). He has relied upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case titled as
“Roma Ahuja Vs. The State & Anr.,
2026 Livelaw (SC) 351” .
I have heard the submissions and carefully perused the
record. In the Judgment of case titled as
“ Roma Ahuja Vs. The
State & Anr., 2026 Livelaw (SC) 351” , the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has held as under:-
“7.2 xxxxxxxx. The computing point
of limitation for the purpose of Section
468, Cr.PC is held to be the date of filing
complaint – the date of initiation of
criminal proceedings. Whether the case
belongs to one instituted before the
Magistrate under Section 173 or it is upon
a complaint filed before the police, what
matters is the date of initiation of criminal
proceedings.
Contd...3/-
-- 2 of 4 --
-3-
7.3 The criminal proceedings can be
said to have been initiated in both
categories of complaint when the
complaint is filed before the Magistrate or
FIR is lodged before the police, as the case
may be. It remains a complaint made
either to the Magistrate or to the police to
become the starting point of initiation of
criminal proceedings.
7.4 The relevant date as held by
Sarah Mathew (supra) would be the date of
filing of complaint or, differently stated,
the date of initiation of criminal
proceedings. xxxxx”
In view of the aforesaid Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of
Roma Ahuja (supra), the relevant date for
computing limitation u/s 468 Cr.PC (corresponding to section
514 of BNSS) is the date of filing of complaint/date of initiation
of criminal proceedings. In the present case, the complaint was
given by the complainant to the police on 24.11.2020 regarding
the detection of theft of electricity in an inspection conducted by
the employees of the complainant company on 05.03.2020. The
criminal proceedings, therefore, stood initiated on 24.11.2020.
Since the complaint was given to the police within the prescribed
period of limitation i.e. three years, the subsequent filing of
chargesheet by the IO on 20.02.2024, by itself, does not render
the prosecution barred by limitation and thus, there is no bar in
taking cognizance, on the point of limitation period, on the basis
of chargesheet filed by the IO.
Contd...4/-
-- 3 of 4 --
-4-
Application under consideration filed by IO stands
disposed of accordingly. Final report/ chargesheet filed by the IO
be registered as per rules.
After perusing the chargesheet, alongwith
documents filed therewith including statements of witnesses
recorded by IO as well as submissions made, I hereby take
cognizance of the offence u/s 135 of the Electricity Act.
There appears to be sufficient material on record to
proceed against the accused i.e. Sadia Khan.
Issue summons to the accused through IO/SHO
concerned, returnable for NDOH.
Be put up for report/further proceedings on
29.10.2026.
(Sachin Gupta)
Special Judge, Electricity-02,
Central, Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi/01.09.2026
-- 4 of 4 --