(1.) THIS revision is preferred by accused 1 to 4 in Crime No. 49/81 of Ponneri Police Station, registered under Sections 448, 341 and 323, I. P. C. challenging the legality of the order passed by the learned Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Ponneri, before whom the abovesaid case is pending, rejecting the prayer of the accused in Crl. M. P. No. 1216/82 seeking the stoppage of further proceedings in the matter on the ground that the investigation in that case, which is a summons case, had not been concluded within a period of six months from the date of their arrest, as contemplated under Section 167 (5), Cr. P. C and seeking an order striking off the charge-sheet and discharging the accused.
(2.) THE learned Magistrate has dismissed the said application on the following grounds, viz. , (1) that the perusal of the charge-sheet discloses that the occurrence took place on 2-3-1981 and that the investigating officer had completed his investigation by 6-5-1981, (2) that the delay in sending the charge-sheet and the records to the Court on 5-3-1982 (sic 9-3-82) had occasioned due to the fact that the medical officer had given her opinion about the nature of the injury by 25-2-1982 and therefore the said delay on the part of the medical officer could not be said to be a delay on the part of the investigating officer prolonging the investigation beyond a period of six months and consequently held that the proceedings were not in derogation of the statutory directions envisaged in Section 167 (5 ). It is as against the said order, the present revision is filed.
(3.) MR. Sam V. Chelliah, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioners submits that as the prosecution in this case relates to a summons case and as the investigating officer has not obtained an order extending the time for continuing the investigation after the lapse of six months from the date of arrest of the petitioners-accused, as contemplated under Section 167 (5), Cr. P. C. the investigation conducted after the lapse of the statutory period of six months from the date of arrest of the petitioners without the permission of the Court, culminating in the laying of the charge-sheet, should be held to be non est in the eye of law and hence the entire proceedings before the Court below should be quashed.