ORDER :

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking orders to call for the records in C.C.No.190 of 2019 pending on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatti and quash the same.

2. The petitioners are accused in C.C.No.190 of 219, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatti. It is not in dispute that the second petitioner and the respondent are brothers; that the first petitioner is the wife of the second petitioner and that the third petitioner is the father of the first petitioner.

3. The case of the respondent put forth in C.C.No.190 of 2019 in short is as follows :

(a) On 25.06.2017, when the respondent/complainant was doing agricultural work in his land, the petitioners had trespassed into the respondent's land, abused him in filthy language and attacked him with stones and caused bleeding injuries. The complainant has preferred a complaint before the fourth respondent, but he refused to receive the same.

(b) The complainant has then proceeded to Government Hospital, K.Vilakku and was taking treatment as inpatient for four days. Meanwhile, the complaint given by the first petitioner was registered in Crime No.253 of 2017 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b) and 323 IPC and final report was filed in S.T.C.No.23 of 2018. Since the Police has not taken action with respect to the complaint lodged by the complainant, he filed a petition before this Court in Crl.OP(MD)No.8170 of 2017, seeking direction for registration of case and in pursuance of the directions of this Court, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.654 of 2017 for the alleged offence under Sections 323, 324 and 506(i) IPC.

(c) Subsequently, the fourth accused has filed a final report closing the FIR as 'mistake of fact'. The fourth accused, who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police has acted in a biased manner and filed the closure report. The notice of the closure report was sent to the complainant only on 13.12.2018 through courier. Thereafter, the complainant, with no other option, has filed a private complaint under Section 199 r/w 200 Cr.P.C.

4. It is not in dispute that the learned Judicial Magistrate, after conducting enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., has taken the private complaint on file in C.C.No.190 of 2019 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 427, 324 and 506(ii) IPC against the petitioners herein. The petitioners, after receipt of the summons, have now come forward with the present original petition, for quashing the case in C.C.No.190 of 2019 pending on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatti.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would mainly contend that the complainant's case was already registered and after investigation, the same was closed as 'mistake of fact', that the complainant after receiving the closure notice, without exhausting the remedy under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C by filing the protest petition, he filed the private complaint under Section 199 r/w 200 Cr.P.C., that the learned Magistrate ought not to have taken the complaint on file and ought not to have issued summons to the petitioners, as the very taking the complaint on file by the learned Magistrate is nothing but an abuse of process of law and that the above complaint has been filed to escape from the clutches of law, as the case in S.T.C.No.20 of 2019 is pending.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the learned trial Judge has failed to consider the civil dispute existed between the second respondent and the complainant and the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.75 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Aundipatti and that the closure report filed by the Police as 'mistake of fact' would clearly shows that the petitioners have been falsely implicated.

7. On considering the grounds raised in the original petition and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is very much clear that