Can I seek quashing of FIR on expiry of limitation period?

Can I seek quashing of FIR on expiry of limitation period? FIR was charged against me on 02/05/2019. I was called to the police station on 02/12/2019 and was released on station bail. They have charged IPC 354 D (stalking through email). But after which no response was there. Recently I got a govt job […]

Can I seek quashing of FIR on expiry of limitation period? FIR was charged against me on 02/05/2019. I was called to the police station on 02/12/2019 and was released on station bail. They have charged IPC 354 D (stalking through email). But after which no response was there. Recently I got a govt job and when applied for a police clearance certificate I came to know the FIR is pending. The police have not filed charge sheet till date to my knowledge. Can I quash the FIR based on expiry of limitation period.

Asked from: Jharkhand

No, you cannot seek the quashing of an FIR solely on the basis of the expiry of the limitation for filing a chargesheet. The limitation period for submitting a chargesheet is applicable only when the accused is in judicial custody.

The limitation period for the submission of a chargesheet is provided for granting statutory bail to the accused under Section 167(2) of the CrPC. There is no provision in the CrPC that allows for the quashing of criminal proceedings due to the non-filing of a chargesheet within the stipulated period.

If the FIR contains a bald allegation or if no offense is discernible from the version of the FIR, you should consider approaching the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC to seek the quashing of the entire proceeding. It appears that, given the nature of the offense, the allegations can potentially be substantiated through electronic evidence. If the prosecution is unable to retrieve any information related to the email, it is certain that they cannot establish your guilt.

Therefore, in this situation, it is advisable to seek the quashing of the FIR on the grounds of baseless and unsubstantiated allegations or the absence of any offense apparent from the context of the FIR.

Also read: Quashing of FIR

Tags: FIR | Quashing

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.