T.M. Hassan Pillai, J.

The prayer made in the petition filled (Annexure A is the true copy of the petition) by the revision petitioner before the court below (judicial 1st Class Magistrate Court-11, Cherthala) in C.C.N.o 522/98 was for ordering re-investigation in C.C. Nos. 533 and 522 of 1998 pending before that court

so as to ensure full justice to them (they claim to be innocent). The learned Magistrate declined to allow the prayer made in Annexure-a petition and calling in question the legality, propriety and correctness of the impugned order (Annexure B order), this revision has been preferred. Without adverting to the assertions made by the revision petitioner in Annexure-A, voicing grievance against the alleged lopsided, faulty and perfunctory manner of investigation conducted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Muhamma Police Station in crime No. 134/98 of that police station which culminated in laying Chellan against the revision petitioners accusing them of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 read with section 34 IPC, this revision can be disposed of.

2. The pivotal or the coe question that is to be answered is whether a judicial magistra