Sections 354 and its sub sections were actually inserted in the Indian Penal Code in the year 2013 and hence any complaint under this section(or sub-sections) cannot be filed for an incident which practically took place prior to 2013. This is also in view of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(1) of the Constitution.
This is the reason why many of the #Metoo complaints which were prior to 2013 didn't get considered and were not filed under these sections.
For Instance, in Tanushree Dutta’s accusations against Nana Patekar, the incident was of 2008 and therefore this complaint by her is legally not considerable but yes if the Court accepts the reason of this delay it could get cosidered. This is because, there is a provision in law that the Hon'ble Court may take cognizance even beyond such limitation period, if and only if, it is satisfied on the facts and the circumstances of the case and that the delay has been properly explained or that it was necessary to do so in the interest of justice. But yes, the chances of the Hon'ble Court exercising such unusual authority would be limited and situational if the incident is very old and out of the normal purview of limitations and that there is no satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing of complaint. So it will all depend on the Hon'ble Court to consider or not to consider the complaint and the reason of the delay depending on the facts, circumstances and seriousness of the offence.
Trying is never bad and yes it all depends upon how the facts,situation & case is presented in the Hon'ble Court.
Thanks & Regards