Section 468,473 limitation prescribed under Section 468 of CrPC can be overlooked

The aforesaid provision is categorical in stating that any limitation prescribed under Section 468 of CrPC can be overlooked if sufficient cause is made out in the facts and circumstances of the individual case in the interest of justice. The said provision, while trying to balance public interest in initiating criminal prosecutions, has been restricted to peculiarities of individual case while clothing the Court with discretionary power. Such a discretion vested in the Court ought to be a principled exercise, wherein the facts and circumstances portrayed justify such an exercise. The intention of the aforesaid provision is to make the inquiry a question of fact and not of untrammelled discretion as to whether in a particular case, the Court should condone the delay. 28. It is in this context that the High Court is bound to consider the facts of the present case concerning the modus of initiation of the case and other factors, before considering the aspect of condonation of delay in terms of Section 473 of CrPC. The approach of the High Court of adjourning adjudication of the interim application seeking disclosure of documents cannot be appreciated. Ideally, the High Court ought to have considered the interim application before dealing with the limitation aspect.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION N.V. RAMANA; CJI., J.K. MAHESHWARI; J., HIMA KOHLI; J. AUGUST 05, 2022 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1167 of 2022 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO. 3417/2022