ORDER :

The Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.5956 of 2016, dated 11.07.2016 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, Madurai District, dismissing the protest petition.

2. The revision petitioner has sent a complaint to the District Superintendent of Police, Madurai and the same was forwarded to the respondent police. After receipt of the said complaint, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.156 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 477 (A) and 420 IPC against one Thangavel and six others, which includes the Village Administrative Officers and their Assistant and after completing the investigation, the Inspector of Police, Alanganalloor Circle has filed a final report as 'mistake of fact'.

3. The learned Judicial Magistrate, after receipt of the final report, has sent a notice to the revision petitioner/complainant and the revision petitioner has entered appearance and filed a protest petition objecting to the negative report filed and sought for the relief to conduct investigation through another Investigating Officer and for filing the final report. The learned Judicial Magistrate, after conducting enquiry, has passed the impugned order on 11.07.2016, dismissing the protest petition. Aggrieved by the said order, the defacto complainant has come forward with the present revision.

4. Whether the impugned order passed in Cr.M.P.No.5956 of 2016, dated 11.07.2016 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, Madurai District, is liable to be set aside?, is the point for consideration.

5. At the outset, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and on perusal of the records, this Court is constrained to say that it is very much shocking and surprising to see as to how the respondent police was acting and furnishing the information and particulars to the complainant in response to the applications filed under the Right to Information Act and to the Courts as per their whims and fancies;

(i) FIR came to be registered on 12.10.2014 ;

(ii) Four accused have filed an application for anticipatory bail in Cr.M.P.No.7743 of 2014, on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Madurai and the prosecution has raised serious objections on 29.10.2014 for granting anticipatory bail and as a result of which, the petition came to be dismissed on 29.10.2014 ;

(iii) Accused 1 to 4 and the accused No.6 have filed separate applications for anticipatory bail again before the Principal Sessions Court, Madurai in Crl.M.P.No.7930 of 2014 and Crl.M.P.No.7742 of 2014 respectively, and though the prosecution has reiterated their serious objections on 10.11.2014, anticipatory bail was granted on that day.

(iv) As per the orders of the Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, the accused who obtained anticipatory bail have appeared before the respondent police and subscribed their signatures till December 2014.

(v) The revision petitioner has filed a petition under the Right to Information Act on 18.12.2014, seeking information about the further action taken in respect of the FIR in Crime No.156 of 2014 and the respondent police has sent a reply on 29.12.2014, informing that no information can be given under the Right to Information Act, since the case was under investigation.

(vi) The revision petitioner has then approached this Court, seeking transfer of investigation in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.614 of 2015 and when the case came up for hearing on 19.01.2015, the respondent police was directed to file a status report within a week.

(vii) When the Criminal Original Petition was posted for hearing on 22.04.2015, the respondent police has served the RCS Notice at about 08.00 a.m., on the revision petitioner and in the afternoon session, they have filed a report along with the final report, dated 17.10.2014 before the High Court.

(viii) The final report, dated 17.10.2014 was filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate C