3.On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that the respondent has admitted that her daughter Parimala forwarded a complaint dated 15.01.2007 to the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. In Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1968 of 2007, this Court by an order dated 09.04.2007 has directed the Authorities to enquire the same. The learned Judicial Magistrate has to wait till the outcome of the investigation. Ignoring that order, the learned Judicial Magistrate failed to call for the records from the Authority and has taken up the private complaint on file. Thereby, there is a possibility of conflicting decisions. The learned Magistrate can try the private complaint along with the final report of the police under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. Since the first respondent has not taken any steps to bring the final decision of the Superintendent of Police to the knowledge of the learned Judicial Magistrate, an inference can be drawn that such report, is in favour of the petitioner. The respondents suppressed the same. In the absence of the final report on the investigation, the learned Judicial Magistrate cannot proceed further and prayed the impugned order to be set aside.
