CHINNASWAMY Vs. N PURUSHOTHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only ground on which the petitioners are challenging the protest complaint is that the cognizance is bad in law when the learned Magistrate has not dealt with the materials collected by the police to refer the matter earlier.

(2.) In fact, it cannot be said that the learned Magistrate has not considered the final report filed by the police earlier. When the said final report was filed, the learned Magistrate had accepted the final report and had issued refer notice to the complainant. At that stage, the learned Magistrate was of the view that the police report could be accepted.

(3.) At the same time, when there is a scheme prescribed for filing a protest complaint, the said valuable right cannot be frustrated by saying that the aspects contained in the complaint were once gone into by the police and the police had opted to refer the matter. The difference is one of investigation and evidence. The materials collected by the police as such cannot form evidence before a court. If the complainant can adduce evidence properly with regard to the facts contained in the complaint, that takes the place for proof through evidence. Therefore, the fact that the learned Magistrate had not described the matters contained in the refer report in detail, will not frustrate the valuable right of the complainant to prefer a protest complaint in the matter.