(Prayer: These Criminal Revision Petitions are filed, against the orders of dismissal, dated 28.11.2018, made in Crl.MP.Nos.1853, 1857, 1855, 1856 and 1854 of 2011 in Spl.CC.No.9 of 2010, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge, Chengalpattu.)

1. These Criminal Revision Petitions are filed, against the orders, dated 28.11.2018, made in Crl.MP.Nos.1853, 1857, 1855, 1856 and 1854 of 2011 in Spl.CC.No.9 of 2010, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge, Chengalpattu, dismissing the said discharge petitions filed under Section 239 of Cr.PC by the Petitioners/A2, A6, A4, A5 and A3.

2. The facts, which are necessary for disposal and leading to filing of these Criminal Revision Petitions, are as follows:-

a. On the basis of the information collected during the preliminary enquiry conducted by the Officials of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Kancheepuram Unit, vide PE-44/07/REV/KM, a First Information Report was registered against N.Ragunathan, Deputy Tahsildar (Election), Thirukazhukundram Taluk Office, Kancheepuram District, in FIR.No.25/AC/ 2007, dated 28.12.2007, under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as a public servant and by abusing his official position, for having accumulated assets from the year 2003, in his name and in the names of his family Members, by investing a total amount of Rs.79,09,795/-, which is exclusive of the amount spent towards documents and registration charges, disproportionate to his salary income and rental income, fixing the check period as 01.01.2003 and 31.07.2007, tentatively. In and by the said First Information Report, it was decided that on the basis of prima facie materials, gathered during the course of the confidential enquiry, which justifies that the accused officer is in possession of assets/ pecuniary resources, in his name and in the names of his dependants, it was just and necessary that an open investigation was to be done to bring out the full facts, concerning the assets and liabilities of the accused officer in order to correctly workout the actual quantum of disproportion in his assets. It is also stated in the said First Information Report that the original First Information Report has been submitted to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Special Judge, Chengalpattu.

b. Thereafter, in the investigation conducted by the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Kancheepuram, on the basis of the statement of the witnesses and scrutiny of documentary evidence, Statements I to VII were prepared, quantifying the disproportionate assets/pecuniary resources with the accused officer, as on 03.01.2004, at Rs.3,53,32,408.26/-. Thereafter, in order to give final opportunity to satisfactorily account for the disproportion, a letter dated, 23.05.2008, was issued to the accused officer, calling upon him to offer a written explanation, on or before 28.05.2008. The said accused Officer has also sent a detailed explanation, dated 18.06.2008, stating that since his savings exceeded the value of the assets acquired during the check period, the accusation of assets acquired disproportionate to his known sources of income is not substantiated and hence, further action should be dropped. By proceedings, dated 28.07.2008, the said accused officer, N.Ragunathan was placed under suspension.

c. Thereafter, a final report dated 23.06.2010, was filed against the accused officer, N.Ragunathan, his wife R.Rajeswari and their daughters, R.Sudha, R.Latha and R.Kavitha and their son R.Karthick, arraying them as A1 to A6, stating that between 01.04.2003 to 03.01.2008 (the check period), A1, being a public servant, committed the offence of 'criminal misconduct by public servant', by acquiring and being in possession of pecuniary resources and properties in his name and in the names of A2 to A6, which were disproportionate to his known sources of income to the extent of Rs.3,52,98,981.66/-, for which he could not satisfactorily account f