MARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.347 of 2004 on the file of the respondent Police. THE First Information Report was registered for offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 506(i), I.P.C.From the records it could be seen that an incomplete final report Section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted to the learned Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri on 3.11.2005. But the learned Magistrate returned the same as the same was defective. After rectifying the defects pointed out by the learned Magistrate, final report was again submitted only on 15.6.2009. THEreafter, cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate. In those circumstances, the petitioner filed a Petition for discharge on the ground that taking cognizance was barred by limitation. THE same was dismissed. Challenging the same, the petitioners are before this Court with this Revision.

(2.) I Have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and also perused the records carefully.

(3.) IN the result, this Revision is treated as Original Petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C and the same is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C. No.101 of 2009 on the file of the Magistrate No.II, Dharmapuri is quashed. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.