N BALAKRISHNAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the 1st accused and he faces allegations, inter alia, under Sections 354, 427 I.P.C. A crime was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the 4th respondent and it was registered as Crime No.94 of 2005, inter alia, under Section 379 I.P.C also. After completing the investigation, final report was filed by the investigator. In such final report, some of the accused shown in the F.I.R were dropped from the array of parties and allegations under Section 379 I.P.C was not raised against the accused.

(2.) Aggrieved by such a final report filed by the investigator, the petitioner had approached this Court and this Court by Ext.P4 order had directed that the petitioner's grievance be considered by the Superintendent of Police and the officer in charge of the police station. Thereupon, Ext.P6 report was filed before the learned Magistrate seeking leave for further investigation under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. That petition was allowed as per the endorsement made on Ext.P6. It is at this stage that the petitioner has come to this Court with the present Writ Petition to assail the order passed by the learned Magistrate granting permission for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.

(3.) What is the reason ? The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that absolutely no new material has been discovered by the investigator and in these circumstances, the prayer for leave for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C is not justified.