1. This revision by the petitioner is directed against the order accepting the referred report by investigating agency as a ‘mistake of fact’.

2. Mr.N.T.Vanamamalai, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that when the complainant filed an application for investigation under Sec.156(3), Crl.P.C. the learned Magistrate passed an order directing the respondent to conduct investigation by registering a case and that without proper investigation the referred report was filed by the Central Crime Branch and that when the protest petition was filed by the complainant before the lower court as against the referred report, the further investigation was ordered by the Magistrate and that despite the said order the investigation was not properly conducted in the line as directed by the Magistrate and the final report had been filed, referring the matter as a mistake of fact and that the same was accepted by the learned Magistrate.

3. I have through the records and heard the counsel for the parties. It is seen from the records that the complainant initially filed a petition under Sec. 156(3), Crl.P.C. for investigation for referring the matter for invest