Chapter XXXVI
Section 470 CrPC: Exclusion of time in certain cases
New Law Update (2024)
Section 493 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Appeals / Revision
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) In computing the period of limitation, the time during which any person has been prosecuting with due diligence another prosecution, whether in a Court of first instance or in a Court of appeal or revision, against the offender, shall be excluded:
Provided that no such exclusion shall be made unless the prosecution relates to the same facts and is prosecuted in good faith in a Court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it.
(2) Where the institution of the prosecution in respect of an offence has been stayed by an injunction or order, then, in computing the period of limitation, the period of the continuance of the injunction or order, the day on which it was issued or made, and the day on which it was withdrawn, shall be excluded.
(3) Where notice of prosecution for an offence has been given, or where, under any law for the time being in force, the previous consent or sanction of the Government or any other authority is required for the institution of any prosecution for an offence, then, in computing the period of limitation, the period of such notice or, as the case may be, the time required for obtaining such consent or sanction shall be excluded.
(4) In computing the period of limitation, the time during which the offender—
(a) has been absent from India or from any territory outside India which is under the administration of the Central Government, or
(b) has avoided arrest by absconding or concealing himself,
shall be excluded.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 470(1)
This sub-section allows for the exclusion of time spent in a previous legal proceeding from the calculation of the limitation period, provided that the prior case was pursued diligently, in good faith, related to the same facts, and failed due to the court lacking jurisdiction or a similar reason.
Section 470(3)
This sub-section excludes the time taken to obtain mandatory government consent or sanction, or the period of a pre-prosecution notice, from the limitation period. This ensures that legal formalities do not unduly penalize the prosecution by causing the limitation period to expire.
Landmark Judgements
State of Punjab v. Sarwan Singh, (1981) 3 SCC 34:
The Supreme Court emphasized that the provisions for exclusion of time under Section 470 CrPC must be strictly construed. It held that the time spent in a previous prosecution can only be excluded if all conditions of the proviso to sub-section (1), particularly ‘good faith’ and ‘defect of jurisdiction’, are strictly met. The Court clarified that the period of limitation, once started, does not stop running unless specifically excluded by law.
V.P. Sreekumar v. State of Kerala, (2018) 4 SCC 579:
This case reiterated the principles regarding the exclusion of time under Section 470(1) CrPC. The Supreme Court underscored the necessity of ‘due diligence’ and ‘good faith’ in pursuing the previous prosecution. It highlighted that the court in which the earlier prosecution was initiated must have been unable to entertain it due to a defect of jurisdiction or a cause of a like nature, and not merely due to tactical withdrawal or procedural errors attributable to the complainant.