Section469
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Commencement of the period of limitation

Repealed From 01 Apr 1974 Act 2 of 1974 As on 15 Oct 2026

Act 2 of 1974 Ministry Home Affairs Enacted 25 Jan 1974 In force 01 Apr 1974

This provision is repealed. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024. It is reproduced because conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with commencement of the period of limitation. The period of limitation, in relation to an offender, shall commence,- (a) on the date of the offence ; The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

(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 such 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 was 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.

Section 469, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).

Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita

BNSS 515 Commencement of period of limitation Text carried over almost unchanged 100%

Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.

Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

  1. Udai Shankar Awasthi vs State of U. P

    Supreme Court of India 09 Jan 2013 Binding (SC) Reportable AIR 2013 SC (Reported as per case header marked REPORTABLE)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    Where a criminal complaint is filed many years after an alleged instantaneous offence (not a continuing offence), beyond the prescribed limitation period under Section 468 CrPC, without plausible explanation for delay, by a litigant who has exhausted all civil and arbitral remedies and lost therein, and where earlier complaints on substantially identical facts have been dismissed on merits, and where material facts such as earlier dismissals have been suppressed, the complaint constitutes an abuse of the process of court and is liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC, regardless of the gravity of the alleged offence or the availability in law to prosecute crimes after long periods. The court must protect innocent persons from harassment by unscrupulous litigants who seek to weaponize criminal proceedings as a tool for vengeance after civil defeat.

    On this section: Prescribes when the period of limitation begins to run. For instantaneous offences, limitation commences on the date of the offence. Applied to establish that limitation began on 15.10.2001 when the representation was rejected.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  2. K. L. Singh vs State of up

    Supreme Court of India 09 Jan 2013 Binding (SC) Reportable

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    Criminal proceedings for offences alleged to have occurred in 1996, with the claim for damages being rejected in 2001 and communicated thereafter, cannot be initiated in 2011 (more than 9 years after rejection). The alleged offence of misappropriation/criminal breach of trust constitutes an instantaneous offence, not a continuing offence. The injury caused was complete on the date of rejection of the claim. Successive complaints on identical facts filed by frustrated litigants who have failed in civil and arbitration proceedings, after full consideration and dismissal of earlier complaints on merit, constitute abuse of process and are not maintainable under law. The courts must protect innocent persons from being harassed by unscrupulous persons through frivolous criminal complaints.

    On this section: When the period of limitation begins. For instantaneous offences, the period commences on the date of offence. Court applied this to hold that the date of rejection of claim (October 15, 2001) was the operative date.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  3. Somesh Shokeen vs State Govt. of Nct of Delhi

    High Court 02 May 2014 Persuasive (Other HC)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The period of limitation prescribed under Section 468 CrPC for taking cognizance of certain offences applies to the date of filing the complaint or institution of prosecution/criminal proceedings, and not to the date when the court or Magistrate takes cognizance. A complaint filed within the period of limitation cannot be rendered infructuous or defeated by delay in court proceedings beyond the control of the complainant, as this would violate the principle 'actus curiae neminem gravabit' (an act of the court shall prejudice no man). The limitation period commences from the date of the offence or the date when the offence is detected, as specified in Section 469 CrPC, and the court's act of taking cognizance is not subject to a separate limitation period.

    On this section: Specifies when the period of limitation commences - either from the date of the offence or from the date when the offence is detected.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  4. Ashok Kumar Mittal vs Sat Kamal Pathak

    High Court 29 Oct 2024 Persuasive (Other High Court) Reportable

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    When a complaint for perjury and false prosecution is filed after a malicious FIR has been quashed by the High Court, the limitation period for such complaint should be computed from the date of quashing of the FIR, not from the date of its registration. The cause of action arises when the false allegations are judicially determined to be baseless. Additionally, when multiple offences are charged together, the limitation period is determined with reference to the offence punishable with the most severe punishment, and the trial court must consider the substantive merits of the complaint before dismissing it on limitation grounds alone.

    On this section: Period of limitation commences from date of offence or, if commission was not known, from first day offence comes to knowledge of aggrieved person or police officer, whichever is earlier.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  5. Anand Singh vs Prem Singh

    High Court 06 Aug 2014 Persuasive (Other High Court)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The bar of limitation prescribed under Section 468 CrPC is mandatory and applies to defamation offences. A court cannot take cognizance of a defamation offence after the expiry of three years from the date of the offence. The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of this limitation bar, and the revisional court erred in ignoring this bar and passing a summoning order. Additionally, a revisional court must issue notice to the petitioner before passing an adverse order, as required by the principles of natural justice.

    On this section: Period of limitation; the court applied clause (a) of sub-section (1) to determine that the limitation period commences on the date of the offence

    Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.

Questions about Section 469

What have the courts held on Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?

Udai Shankar Awasthi vs State of U. P (09 Jan 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Prescribes when the period of limitation begins to run. For instantaneous offences, limitation commences on the date of the offence. Applied to establish that limitation began on 15.10.2001 when the representation was rejected. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2024.

How do I find court cases under Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?

In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 469, section 469 CRPC, section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Udai Shankar Awasthi vs State of U. P (09 Jan 2013).

What should I read with Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?

For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 515 (Commencement of period of limitation), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.

When did Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?

Section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 469, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.

Other sections of this Act

Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.