Advocates:
['M/s Ganapathi Subramanian P', '', 'Sekar B', 'Yazhini G', '', 'Public Prosecutor']

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.431 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Date : 06.06.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.431 of 2022

Nainamohamed

... Petitioner/Defacto

Complainant

vs.

The Inspector of Police,

Keeramangalam Police Station,

Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.145 of 2016)

... Respondent/ Respondent

PRAYER : This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397(1)

r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in order

dated 27.08.2021 passed in R.No.74 of 2019 on the file of the

learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi and set

aside the same by allowing this Criminal Revision Petition.

For Petitioner

: Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian

For Respondent

: Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi,

Government Advocate (Crl. Side).

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision Petition is directed against the order

passed in R.No.74 of 2019 dated 27.08.2021 dismissing the protest

petition for default.

2.The revision petitioner is the defacto complainant and on the

basis of the complaint lodged by him, FIR came to be registered in

Crime No.145 of 2016 against three persons for the offences alleged

under Sections 294(b), 323, 420 and 506(1) IPC.

3.The respondent police, after completing the investigation,

has filed a final report dated 27.09.2016 as 'mistake of fact'.

4.The learned Judicial Magistrate, after receiving the final

report, has sent a notice to the revision petitioner/defacto

complainant. On receiving the same, the revision petitioner has

filed a protest petition before the concerned Court.

5.It is evident from the impugned order that since the revision

petitioner was called absent and as there was no representation for

him, the learned Judicial Magistrate, by observing that sufficient

opportunities were already given, but there was no progress,

1/2

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.431 of 2022

dismissed the protest petition for default.

6.At this juncture, the learned counsel for the revision

petitioner would submit that since the protest petition was

dismissed for default, the revision petitioner may be granted

liberty to file a private complaint.

7.It is a settled position of law that even if the negative

report filed by the police is accepted and the protest petition

filed by the defacto complainant is dismissed, after enquiry, that

will not prevent or debar or disentitle the complainant from filing

a private complaint.

8.In view of the above, this Criminal Revision Petition is

dismissed and the revision petitioner is at liberty to file a

private complaint before the concerned Court.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

// True Copy //

/ /2022

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

csm

Note : In view of the present lock down owing

to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order

may be utilized for official purposes, but,

ensuring that the copy of the order that is

presented is the correct copy, shall be the

responsibility

of

the

advocate/litigant

concerned.

To

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi.

2.The Inspector of Police,

Keeramangalam Police Station,

Pudukkottai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Madurai.

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.431 of 2022

06.06.2022

IM(CO)

KB(20.06.2022) 2P 4C

2/2

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/