B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C. C. No. 1206 of 1999 on the file of the learned Special Judicial First class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise, cuddapah in which the petitioner is arrayed as the sole accused. ( 2 ) THE petitioner is alleged to have committed an offence punishable under section 34 (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise act. It is the case of the prosecution that on 3-5-1995 at 10. 30 a. m. during the route watch conducted by the Prohibition and Excise inspector, Yerraguntla and his staff, the petitioner herein was found carrying a plastic can on his right hand shoulder and on seeing the excise staff the petitioner tried to run away and on suspicion, the Inspector of Prohibition and Excise surrounded him and detained him and also examined the contents of the black plastic can and found 35 litres of I. D liquor in it and seized the same. Basing on the same, a case in Crime no. 101/94-95 on the file of the Yerraguntla prohibition and Excise Station has been registered. After completing the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed on 16-6-1998. ( 3 ) IN this petition, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the sentence for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of the Act is only six months and the time for filing the charge-sheet is one year from the date of offence. In this case, the offence took place on 3-5-1995 and the charge-sheet is filed on 16-6-1998 and therefore, the charge-sheet is barred by limitation. Learned Counsel would place reliance upon the decision of a Division bench of this Court in Kondakkagiri Kesava reddy v. State of A. P. in which it is held "the sentence for the offence u/s. 34 (a) of the A. P. Excise Act is only six months. For such offence the time prescribed for filing the charge-sheet is one year from the date of alleged offence. Since the charge-sheet is filed after 5 years 8 months in this case, the charge-sheet is barred by limitation and the proceedings are liable to be quashed. " ( 4 ) EVIDENTLY, the Division Bench did not notice Section 34 (a) of the Act which is to the following effect:"34. Since the charge-sheet is filed after 5 years 8 months in this case, the charge-sheet is barred by limitation and the proceedings are liable to be quashed. " ( 4 ) EVIDENTLY, the Division Bench did not notice Section 34 (a) of the Act which is to the following effect:"34. Penalties for illegal import. etc. : Whoever, in contravention of this Act or of any rule, notification or order made, issued or passed thereunder or of any licence or permit granted or issued under this Act,- (a) imports, exports, transports, manufactures, collects or possesses or sells any intoxicant; shall, on conviction, be punished,- (1) in the case of an offence falling under clause (a),- (i) where the intoxicant involved in the offence is less than such quantity as may be notified in this behalf with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend upto three years and with fine which shall not be less than rupees five thousand but which may extend upto rupees twenty thousand". ( 5 ) FROM a bare reading of Section 34 (a) of the Act, it is clear that where the intoxicant involved in the offence is less than such quantity as may be notified in this behalf, the punishment prescribed is imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may be extended upto three years and with fine which shall not be less than Rs. 5. 000. 00 but which may extend upto Rs. 20. 000. 00. It is thus clear that the prescribed punishment is not six months. The provision prescribes punishment of not less than six months but it may extend up to three years. Therefore, the observation of the division Bench that the punishment prescribed for the offence falling under section 34 (a) of the Act is six months is per incuriam. ( 6 ) IT is thus clearly evident that the punishment of six months is minimum but not exceeding three years together with fine. The period of limitation for taking cognizance as prescribed under Section 468 cr. P. C. shall be three years, if the offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years. Therefore, the time for filing of the charge-sheet in the instant case would be three years. The period of limitation for taking cognizance as prescribed under Section 468 cr. P. C. shall be three years, if the offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years. Therefore, the time for filing of the charge-sheet in the instant case would be three years. ( 7 ) THE offence is alleged to have taken place on 3-5-1995 and whereas the excise authorities filed the charge-sheet after investigating the crime only on 16-6-1998. the charge-sheet filed by the investigating agency is evidently barred by limitation since it is filed beyond the period of three years. The learned Magistrate ought not to have taken the cognizance of the offence as the same is barred under Section 468 Cr. P. C. The proceedings in C. CNo. 1206 of 1999 on the file of the Special Judicial First Class magistrate for Prohibition and Excise are liable to be quashed and the same are accordingly quashed. ( 8 ) THE Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed.