1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.745 OF 2010 Rajahmad @ Raju Chandso Tamboli ... Applicant. V/s The State of Maharahtra .... Respondent. Mr. R. Patel i/b Prashant Hagare for the applicant. Mrs. M.R. Tidake, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 6th May, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. Applicant has filed this application for quashing the criminal complaint filed by his wife under section 498A, 323, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is submitted that the said complaint has been filed after a period of three years from the date of alleged incident and, therefore, it is barred by limitation. It is submitted that the complainant left the matrimonial house on 15/9/2005 and the complaint was lodged on 14/10/2008. 2 It is, therefore, submitted that the complaint is filed after 3 years and, therefore, in view of provisions of section 468 of the Cr.P.C., it is barred by limitation since it is filed after 3 years after the date of incident. 4. The said submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of th applicant cannot be accepted taking into consideration the statements made in the FIR. In view of the statements made in the FIR, it does appear, prima facie, that the allegation which is made by the complainant is for the offence punishable under section 506 II for which punishment is upto 7 years and, therefore, provisions of section 468 would not be attracted. Therefore, there is no merit in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and, therefore, this is not a fit case for quashing the complaint under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Application is dismissed. Liberty, however, is granted to the applicant to file an application for discharge, if so advised. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3