SC Clarifies the limitation period under 468 of CR.P.C

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. SC Clarifies the...

In Ghanshyam Soni v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2025 INSC 803), the Supreme Court held that for Section 468 CrPC, the limitation period runs from the date a complaint is filed, not when the Magistrate takes cognizance. A timely 498A IPC complaint cannot be dismissed as time-barred due to court delays. Relying on Bharat Damodar Kale (2003) and Sarah Mathew (2014), the Court said penalizing a complainant for judicial delay is unfair and may breach Article 14.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Cheque Law In Cash Crisis: How P.C. Hari Rewrites Enforceability At The Cost Of Commercial Certainty

The decision of the Kerala High Court in P.C. Hari v. Shine Varghese1 presents a significant yet contentious development in the law governing dishonour of cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. While the Court endeavours to harmonize the NI Act with provisions of the Income Tax Act, particularly Section 269SS... Read more »

Supreme Court Upholds Fundamental Right to Be Informed of Arrest Grounds

In Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025), the Supreme Court held informing grounds of arrest to relative of accused is not sufficient and that Article 22(1) mandates that every arrested person must be informed about the grounds of arrest in a way they understand. The court declared the Appellant’s arrest was illegal due to... Read more » Read more »

Baby Manji Yamada Vs. Union of India, AIR (2009)

The case of Baby Manji Yamada v. Union of India, AIR (2009) SC 84, addressed the legal complexities of cross-border surrogacy. Following the separation of a Japanese couple before the birth of Baby Manji through a surrogacy agreement with an Indian surrogate, the Supreme Court prioritized the child’s welfare, directing the issuance of travel documents... Read more » Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.