Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XXXVI: Limitation for Taking Cognizance of Certain Offences
Section 468: Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
Except as otherwise provided, no court can take cognizance of certain offences after the limitation period: six months for offences punishable with fine only, one year for offences punishable with imprisonment up to one year, and three years for offences punishable with imprisonment over one year and up to three years.
- For offences tried together, the period is set by the most severely punishable one.
- Offences punishable with more than three years have no limitation period under this section.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
(1) Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this Code, no Court shall take cognizance of an offence of the category specified in sub-section (2), after the expiry of the period of limitation.
(2) The period of limitation shall be—
(a) six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only;
(b) one year, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year; 1. Provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to certain economic offences, see the Economic Offences (Inapplicability of Limitation) Act, 1974 (12 of 1974), s. 2 and Sch.
(c) three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years. [(3) For the purposes of this section, the period of limitation, in relation to offences which may be tried together, shall be determined with reference to the offence which is punishable with the more severe punishment or, as the case may be, the most severe punishment.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 468
-
The Central Bureau of Investigation v. Mir Usman @ Ara @ Mir Usman Ali
When victim herself has stepped into witness box, whether her examination can be done in piecemeal.
-
Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Issue arose whether the cognizance on the complaint u/ss.498A rw s.34 IPC was taken beyond the limitation period as mandated u/s.468 CrPC; and whether the prima facie case u/ss.498A rw s.34 IPC was made out against the…
-
Punit Beriwala v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the subject FIR against Respondent Nos.2 and 3 and whether a cognizable offence against them is prima facie made out from a reading of the subject complaint.
-
M/S Jm Laboratories and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another
Non-speaking summoning order issued by Magistrate against the appellants. Petition under Section 482, CrPC filed by the appellants for quashing, dismissed by High Court. Issue as regards the legality of the summoning…
- Smt. Ritu Aggarwal @ Aditi & Ors v. State & Anr
- Dr Sonia D Narang v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Prithvi Pal Singh & Ors v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors
- Edwin Dsouza Through His Gpa v. Ran Singh & Anr
- Edwin D Souza Through Gpa v. Ran Singh & Anr
-
Fuleshwar Gope v. Union of India & Ors.
Issue arose as to whether the validity of the Sanction Order can be challenged at any stage; whether violation of s.45(2) of the UAPA r/w rr.3 and 4 of the 2008 Rules, if any, vitiates the proceedings, whether violation…
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board
- Satpal Singh Palli & Anr v. State & Anr
- Anshul Bansal v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Jitin Mittal & Ors v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Krishan Gopal Yadav & Ors v. The State Gnct, Delhi & Anr
- Yogesh Chandar Goyal & Ors v. The State & Anr
- Sanghmitra v. State
- Sh. Hemal Mehta & Anr v. State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi Through S.H.O
-
Ram Nath v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Interplay between the provisions of Chapter IX of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) and ss.272 and 273 of the Penal Code, 1860; whether the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. Pepsico…
- Balbir Singh & Ors v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi
- Ugo Geoffery Franklin v. State NCT of Delhi
- Guneet Singh Dhingra & Ors v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr
- Kailash Vijayvargiya v. Rajlakshmi Chaudhuri
- Smt Satula Devi v. Mr Rajeev Sharma & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Faraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. M/S Shonkh Technologies Ltd & Ors
- State Through Deputy Superintendent of Police v. R. Soundirarasu Etc.
- Reliance Industries Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors.
- Kamatchi v. Lakshmi Narayanan
- Amritlal v. Shantilal Soni & Ors.
- M/S Cheminova India Limited & Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. v. M/S. Pepsi Foods Ltd. (Now Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.)
- Krishna Lal Chawla & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal & Ors. Etc.
- Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited Through Authorised Signatory v. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors.
- Union of India & Ors. v. V. R. Nanukuttan Nair
- Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pankaj Arora (Secretary) and Others
- Neeraj Kumar Sainy and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors.
- Nidhi Kaim and Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
- Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Gaurav Varshney & Anr.
- Krishna Bhatacharjee v. Sarathi Choudhury and Anr.
- Sirajul & Ors. v. The State of U.P. &Anr.
- Petroleum & Natural Gas Regulatory Board v. Indraprastha Gas Limited & Ors.
- Mrs. Sarah Mathew v. The Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases by Its Director - Dr. K.M. Cherian & Ors.
- Udai Shankar Awasthi v. State of U.P. Anr.
- Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Inderjit Singh Grewal v. State of Punjab & Anr.
- M. Saravana Porselvi v. A.R. Chandrashekar @ Parthiban & Ors.
- P.K. Choudhury v. Commander, 48 Brtf (Gref)
- Sanapareddy Maheedhar and Anr v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.
- Japani Sahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty
- State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Lalit Somdatta Nagpal and Anr.
- M/S Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. v. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors.
- K.G. Premshanker v. Inspector of Police and Anr.
- P. Rama Chandra Rao v. State of Karnataka
- Raju v. State of Haryana
- M.N. Damani v. S.K. Sinha and Ors.
- Registrar of Companies v. Rajshree Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. and Ors.
- State of Himachal Pradesh v. Tara Dutt and Anr.
- State of Maharashtra v. Keshav Ramchandra Pangare and Anr.
- Arun Vyas and Anr. v. Anita Vyas
- State of Rajasthan v. Sanjay Kumar and Ors.
- Keshav Lal Thakur v. State of Bihar
- Smt. Vanka Radhamanohari v. Vanke Venkata Reddy and Ors.
- Gokak Patel Volkart Ltd. v. Dundayya Gurushiddaiah Hiremath and Ors.
- Srinivasa Gopal v. Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh (Now State)
- Bhagirath Kanoria & Ors. Etc v. State of M.P. & Ors. Etc.
- State of Punjab v. Sarwan Singh
- Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna
- Surinder Mohan Vikal v. Ascharaj Lal Chopra