1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN Crl.R.C.(MD) No.136 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 T.Manoharan . . . Revision Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs. 1.State represented by The Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police station, Madurai District. (Crime No.25/2010) . . . 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Karthigai Selvi 3.Sivaperumal . . . Respondents 2 & 3/Accused 1 & 2 Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397(1) read with 401 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records and set aside the consequential order dated 03.02.2011 passed in Crl.M.P.No.9744 of 2010 in C.C.No.539 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai. For petitioner : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar For 1st Respondent : Mr.P.Rajendran, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Respondents 2 & 3 : Mr.R.Selvaraj O R D E R The 1st respondent filed the final report charging the respondents 2 and 3 for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 408, 420 read with 109 of Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the first respondent filed Cr.M.P.No.9744 of 2010 under Section 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code, seeking the leave of the Court to conduct further investigation and notice were sent to the accused and they appeared and opposed the application. 2. The Court of Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai by an order dated 22.01.2011 made in Cr.M.P.No.9744 of 2010 has ordered the petition by taking into consideration of the orders passed by this Court for expeditious disposal and directed the first respondent to conduct further investigation from the date of the order and final report should be filed on or before 03.02.2011. When the case was called on 03.02.2011, the accused were present and neither the investigating officer nor the Assistant Public Prosecutor was present. Therefore, the lower Court vide order dated 03.02.2011 closed the application and issued summons to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 witnesses 1 to 10. Challenging the vires of the same, the present Criminal Revision Case has been filed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that there are many lapses in the investigation conducted by the prosecution and hence, the first respondent filed an application under Section 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code for further investigation and it was ordered subject to the condition that the further investigation should be completed and the charge sheet should be filed within a stipulated date and hence it is obligation on the part of the first respondent to conduct further investigation and to file additional report, but he has failed to do so. Hence, the petitioner has brought forth this Criminal Revision Case. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that on account of pressure of work, the first respondent was not in a position to conduct further investigation and if extension of time is granted, further investigation will be conducted and additional final report will be filed. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 would submit that already the trial had commenced and 14 witnesses were examined and the accused will be prejudiced if further investigation is ordered. 6. This Court taking into consideration the rival submissions is of the view that since on account of the absence of the Investigating Officer and the Assistant Public Prosecutor the petition seeking further investigation was closed, one more opportunity is to be given to the first respondent to conduct further investigation and to file additional final report within a stipulated time. It is a settled position that for ordering further investigation, the accused need not be heard. 7. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order of the Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai dated 03.02.2011 is set aside and the first respondent is directed to further investigate into the matter and to file additional final report on or before 10.05.2011. SD/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police station, Madurai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Order in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.136 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 31.03.2011 sj PAM 08.04.2011/4C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/