The Criminal revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai made in Crl.MP.No.18930 of 2014 in SC.No.230 of 2014 dated 04.07.2015, dismissing the discharge petition filed by the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the learned Principal Sessions Judge failed to appreciate the fact that the inordinate delay in lodging the complaint is fatal to the prosecution and also continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of process of law. Section 294(b) was added only in the final report which do not find place in the FIR. There is no ingredients available in the records for the offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Section 3(i)(xii) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 is added in the final report, that too after expiry of six months from the date of commencement of investigation. The petitioner is working as Head Constable in Tamil Nadu Special Police, 8th battalion, Delhi and there is no possibilities to contact the defacto complainant. The previous complaint for the very same occurrence, the defacto complainant lodged complaint before the Director Genera