HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition Nos.7004, 7007 of 2008 and 909 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: These three criminal petitions are filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing further proceedings against the petitioners- A.1 & A.2 in CC Nos.513, 512 and 514 of 2007 respectively, on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyberabad. 2. On a complaint given by the 2nd respondent herein, police registered FIR in Cr.Nos.223, 222 and 232 of 2003 respectively, on the file of Kushaiguda PS against the petitioners-A.1 and A.2, for the offences under sections 447, 427 and 506 IPC and after investigation, filed charge sheets and the same were taken cognizance in CC Nos. 513, 512 and 514 of 2007 respectively, by the learned Magistrate. The copy of the charge sheet is filed along with the criminal petitions, which discloses that the charge sheet was filed on 31.12.2005. The report of the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, also shows that the charge sheets were signed on 31.12.2005 by the Investigating Officer and the same were filed on 08.05.2007 vide Inward No.4026/2007 and the same were taken cognizance on 30.05.2007. The offences said to have taken place on 24.06.2003, 24.06.2003 and 29.06.2003 respectively. 3. Irrespective of the date on which the charge sheet is filed, it is clear that the cognizance of the offences was taken about four years after commission of the offences. Section 468 Cr.P.C. prescribes limitation of three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years. The alleged offences under sections 447 and 427 IPC attracts the punishment of imprisonment for three months, or fine of Rs.500/- or both, and imprisonment for 2 years or fine or both, respectively. It is therefore clear that the cognizance of the offences was taken long after expiry of the period of limitation prescribed under section 468 Cr.P.C. Hence, the continuance of further proceedings against the petitioners-A.1 & A.2 in CC Nos. 513, 512 and 514 of 2007 respectively, does not therefore serve any useful purpose and would only be an abuse of process of law. 4. In the circumstances, it is considered a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of the Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash further proceedings against the petitioners-A.1 & A.2 in CC Nos. 513, 512 and 514 of 2007 respectively, on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri, Cyberabad and they are accordingly quashed. 5. In the result, all the three criminal petitions are allowed. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 15.12.2011 bss