R. MOORTHY Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the defacto complainant. Aggrieved by the cognizance taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court I, Villupuram in C.C.No.47 of 2012 based on the final report filed by the Law Enforcing Agency under section 173(2) of Crimial P.C. 1973 without furnishing the final report to the defacto complainant, the present petition is filed.

(2.) The case of the petitioner are as follows:

(3.) Thereafter, the Law Enforcing Agency conducted investigation and filed the final report under Sec. 173(2) Crimial P.C. 1973 implicating two persons A1 Kumar and A2 Vijayan without giving any notice to the petitioner and had not implicated the main accused persons who had actively participated in the offence and the trial Court also accepted the final report and issued process for trial. In view of the non furnishing of the final report to the petitioner, he is not able to file appropriate petition before the lower Court for implicating the other accused persons. Hence, the petitioner filed the present petition under section 482 of Crimial P.C. 1973 against the order dated 24.01.2012 in CC No.47/2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.1 Villupuram for taking cognizance against the accused persons.