A servent steals his owner's watch; when owner comes to know about it he does not file any complaint to police,forgives him & says to keep that watch with him forever.
Later after 4 yrs that servent tells this story to his friend.
Here limitation period (3 yrs) to file any complaint of theft against that servent has passed from the side of that owner but........
In case this friend becomes JEALOUS & want to get that servant punished WILL YOU SAY LIMITATION TIME FROM HIS SIDE STARTS FROM THE MOMENT HE LISTENS THAT STORY AND HE CAN FILE A COMPLAINT OF THEFT AGAINST SERVANT & GET HIM PUNISHED.
2007-05-15 01:01:48 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
In India, Section 469 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 clearly provides (1) the period of limitation, in relation to an offender, shall commence -
(a) On the date of the offence; or
(b) Where the commission of the offence was not known to the person aggrieved by the offence or to
Any police officer, the first day on which offence comes to the knowledge of such person or to any police
Officer, whichever is earlier; or
(c) Where it is not known by whom the offence committed, the first day on which the identity of the
Offender is known to the person aggrieved by the offence or to the police officer making investigation
Into the offence, whichever is earlier?
(2) In computing the said period, the day from which such period is to be computed shall be excluded.
Here section469 (1)(b) clearly provides that the period of limitation ,in relation to the servant (offender) ,shall commence where the commission of the offence comes to the knowledge of the owner (aggrieved), from the first day it came to his knowledge. As this happened four years back & the aggrieved owner of the watch had not made any complaint regarding the theft at that time & now after four years some one else wants to pursue this complaint who is not competent to do so as the time limitation for any court to take cognizance has already expired.
2007-05-15 01:46:27 · answer #1 · answered by vijay m Indian Lawyer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is common sense that once the matter is settled amicably between owner and servant,the subject matter does not remain a crime to be raked up by any third party not affected at all by any action of the servant or owner and by the person who has no business to interfere. The servant's friend will make only a mockery of himself by persuing the matter even if the matter was not beyond limitation in the eyes of any law.
2007-05-16 13:55:23 · answer #2 · answered by chandraprakash 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The friend has no grounds to file a theft complaint, it was not his property that was affected. Also, if the owner told the servant to keep the watch, it is no longer stolen but a gift. There is no crime here to report.
2007-05-15 08:06:32 · answer #3 · answered by kmerian 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The friend can lodge a complaint. But, the case is to be supported by the owner. So, in that case, the owner's side already lost the limitation period.*
2007-05-15 08:19:47 · answer #4 · answered by tdrajagopal 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
servent and OWNER?
Well since slavery was abolished over 150 years ago, I think the statute of limitations has been exceded!
2007-05-15 08:07:18 · answer #5 · answered by Mulysa 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋