Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 519
Extension of period of limitation in certain cases
Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, any Court may take cognizance of an offence after the expiry of the period of limitation, if it is satisfied on the facts and in the circumstances of the case that the delay has been properly explained or that it is necessary so to do in the interests of justice.
Why this exists
Rigid deadlines, however sensible in general, can sometimes produce unjust results in unusual cases -- perhaps a victim was too traumatized or intimidated to act sooner, or genuine circumstances beyond anyone's control caused the delay. This safety-valve provision gives courts limited discretion to still hear a genuinely deserving case even beyond the strict time limit, balancing certainty with fairness. It corresponds to section 473 of the earlier CrPC.
How courts read it
Courts applying the equivalent CrPC provision have cautioned that this is an exception to be used sparingly and only on a genuine, satisfactorily explained justification for the delay, or a compelling interest-of-justice reason -- it is not meant to routinely override the limitation scheme.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: This section lets courts freely ignore limitation periods whenever convenient.
Fact: Courts are expected to use this power sparingly, only where the delay is genuinely and satisfactorily explained or the interests of justice truly demand it, not as a routine override.