The Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Peren on Tuesday “reserved” the order of the final hearing on the “issue of limitation” pertaining to Nagaland chief minister, T.R. Zeliang’s education row.
In the proceeding that stretched on for more than four hours, counsels’ of both complainant and defendant argued their case to the magistrate.
The defendant’s counsel, K. Zhimomi through a “written objection” signed by T.R Zeliang, argued that the case against his client be dismissed as complaint against Zeliang was filed after more than two years, which was beyond the period of limitation-one year period.
With regards to “knowledge of offence” in the issue of limitation, Zhimomi argued that affidavit and other details of election candidates were made public through various means in February 2013.
Zeliang’s counsel also stated that the complainant, a supporter of his client’s political rival, was politically motivated.
Representing the complainant, former advocate general of Nagaland, KN Balgopal, argued that limitation, as per section 469 CrPC a, b, and c, would commence either from the date of commission of the offence, or from the date of knowledge of the offence or from the date of identification of the offender.
He stated that all these three ingredients had to be present for fixing the period of limitation, and, therefore, argued that if an offence was committed on a particular date but there was neither knowledge nor identification of the offender, the limitation would commence only after establishing both.
He also argued that even after knowing both date and knowledge of offence, if the offender was not identified, the limitation would start only after offender was identified.
Emphasising his point, Balgopal remarked, “People would make a mockery of criminal proceedings because all an offender has to do is commit an offence, disappear and re-appear only after the period of limitation expires.”
He also pointed out the respondent had made an addition to the Supreme Court order in his written objection so as to prejudice the court (JMFC), and stated that the act was liable for initiation of appropriate proceedings by the appropriate court.
After hearing both the sides, the JMFC Peren on Tuesday “reserved the judgement” without setting any time-frame.
It may be mentioned that entry to the DC office compound was restricted only to lawyers, security personnel, office staff, and media. Banners put up by Zeliang’s supporters were also seen hanging along the boundary wall of the DC’s office complex.
To express solidarity with their leader, nearly one thousand NPF youth members and party workers were present outside the court premises till the end of hearing.
Few Congress party members were also present at the scene. Hundreds of anti-riot police personnel were also present.