NACHIMUTHU Vs. PALANICHAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner being the complainant filed a complaint against the respondent Palanichamy for the offences under Sections 341, 324 and 307 IPC, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Dindigul on 7-10-1992.

(2.) The allegation in the complaint is that on 7-5-1991 at about 9-30 p.m. the respondent /accused way laid the complainant, who was on the way to his garden and attacked him with Aruval by exclaiming (Vernacular matter is omitted. -Ed.) and inflicted injury on his head and then the accused/ respondent took to his heels. The above private complaint has been preferred by the petitioner, since police did not take proper action on his complaint for the above said offences.

(3.) On entertaining this complaint, the learned Judicial Magistrate conducted the enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. by recording sworn statements of PWs-1 to 4. Ultimately the learned Magistrate passed an order in C. C. No. 639 of 1992 on 19-3-1993, dismissing the complaint under Section 203 Cr. P. C. on the sole ground that the offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out. The said order in single para, giving the reasons for dismissing the impugned complaint, read thus :-(Vernacular matter is omitted. - Ed.)Aggrieved over this the petitioner has preferred this revision.