Introduction
Section 516 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with the exclusion of certain periods while calculating the limitation period for taking cognizance of an offence.
The provision recognises that a person may be prevented from initiating proceedings within time because of legal proceedings, an injunction, or other circumstances beyond their control.
Meaning of Section 516
Section 516 provides that certain periods may be excluded while calculating the period of limitation.
Where a person has been diligently pursuing another prosecution or proceeding relating to the same matter, the time spent in that proceeding may be excluded if the proceeding was pursued in good faith and before a court that was unable to entertain it because of a defect of jurisdiction or another similar cause.
The section also provides for exclusion of time during which the institution of proceedings was stayed by an injunction or order.
Statutory Basis
Section 516 corresponds to Section 470 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
It applies to the calculation of limitation for taking cognizance of offences.
Object and Purpose
The main purposes of Section 516 are:
- To prevent unfair loss of legal remedy due to circumstances beyond the control of the complainant.
- To exclude time spent in bona fide legal proceedings.
- To protect persons who have acted diligently and in good faith.
- To prevent the limitation law from operating harshly.
- To ensure that genuine claims are not rejected merely because time was spent before an incompetent court or during a legal stay.
Essential Elements
1. The proceeding must relate to the same matter
The earlier proceeding must concern the same matter for which criminal cognizance is sought.
A completely unrelated proceeding will not normally qualify for exclusion.
2. The proceeding must be pursued in good faith
The person must have acted honestly and with due care.
A proceeding filed only to delay the matter or misuse the legal process will not receive the benefit of this provision.
3. The person must have acted with due diligence
The person must have pursued the earlier proceeding properly and without unnecessary delay.
The protection is not available to a person who has been careless or inactive.
4. The earlier proceeding must have been before a court
The proceeding must have been pursued before a court that could not entertain it because of a defect of jurisdiction or another similar cause.
5. Time covered by an injunction or stay may be excluded
Where the institution of criminal proceedings was prevented by an injunction or order, the period during which the restriction remained in force may be excluded.
6. Only the legally relevant period is excluded
The court must determine the exact period that qualifies for exclusion. Every period of delay does not automatically become excluded.
Situations Covered by Section 516
Proceedings before a court without jurisdiction
If a person pursues a case before a court that lacks jurisdiction, the time spent in that proceeding may be excluded when the required conditions are satisfied.
Proceedings prevented by an injunction
If a court order prevents the institution of criminal proceedings, the period during which the order operates may be excluded.
Proceedings ended because of a similar cause
The provision may also apply where the earlier proceeding could not be entertained because of a cause similar to a defect of jurisdiction.
Procedure
The court generally follows these steps:
- Determine the ordinary limitation period applicable to the offence.
- Identify the earlier proceeding or legal restriction relied upon.
- Examine whether the earlier proceeding concerned the same matter.
- Determine whether it was pursued in good faith and with due diligence.
- Identify the period spent in the earlier proceeding or the period covered by the injunction.
- Exclude the legally permissible period.
- Calculate the remaining limitation period.
- Determine whether cognizance was taken within the revised period.
Powers of the Court
The court may:
- Examine whether the earlier proceeding was bona fide.
- Determine whether the person acted with due diligence.
- Exclude time spent before a court lacking jurisdiction.
- Exclude the period during which an injunction or order operated.
- Calculate the remaining limitation period.
- Decide whether the complaint or proceeding is within time after applying the exclusion.
Important Distinctions
Exclusion of time and condonation of delay
Exclusion of time removes a legally recognised period from the calculation of limitation. Condonation of delay, on the other hand, allows the court to excuse delay after considering the explanation given by the person.
Good faith and mere filing
A person does not receive protection merely because an earlier proceeding was filed. The proceeding must have been pursued honestly and with due diligence.
Defect of jurisdiction and an adverse decision
A proceeding dismissed on merits is not automatically treated as a proceeding before a court lacking jurisdiction. The reason for the earlier proceeding’s failure is important.
Stay period and entire delay
Only the period during which the institution of proceedings was legally prevented may be excluded. Unconnected delay before or after the stay is not automatically excluded.
BNSS and CrPC
Section 516 of the BNSS corresponds to Section 470 of the CrPC, 1973.
The provision continues the principle that limitation must be calculated fairly by excluding periods spent in bona fide proceedings or during a legal prohibition against instituting the case.
Common Confusions
Is every earlier proceeding sufficient for exclusion?
No. The earlier proceeding must relate to the same matter and must satisfy the conditions of good faith, due diligence, and legal relevance.
Does lack of jurisdiction automatically exclude the entire period?
No. The court must examine the circumstances and determine the period that can legally be excluded.
Can a person claim exclusion after deliberately delaying the case?
No. The person must have acted in good faith and with due diligence.
Is every stay order relevant?
Only a stay or injunction that prevented the institution of the relevant proceeding may qualify for exclusion.
Does Section 516 permanently extend limitation?
No. It only excludes a qualifying period while calculating the limitation period. It does not create an unlimited extension.
Topic at a Glance
- Section: 516, BNSS, 2023
- Subject: Exclusion of time in certain cases
- Corresponding provision: Section 470, CrPC, 1973
- Main principle: Certain periods are excluded while calculating limitation
- Important conditions: Same matter, good faith, due diligence, and legal relevance
- Examples: Proceedings before a court without jurisdiction and periods covered by injunctions or stay orders
- Purpose: To prevent unfair application of limitation law
Quick Revision
Section 516 BNSS allows exclusion of certain periods while calculating limitation. Time spent in a bona fide proceeding before a court unable to entertain the matter due to lack of jurisdiction or a similar cause may be excluded. The period during which proceedings were prevented by an injunction or order may also be excluded.
ALSO READ: Section 515 – Commencement of period of limitation
Conclusion
Section 516 of the BNSS ensures that limitation rules operate fairly. It protects persons who have pursued their legal remedy honestly but were prevented from proceeding because of jurisdictional defects or court orders. However, the benefit is available only when the statutory conditions of good faith, due diligence, and connection with the same matter are satisfied.
