Order This revision is directed against the order of the learned Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Mannargudi, dismissing the petition in Crl. M.P.No.993 of 1981 filed under Section 300 Criminal Procedure Code. 2. The revision petitioners are the accused 1 to 3 in C.C.No.91 of 1981, which arose on a private complaint filed by the respondent. In respect of the incident which is the subject-matter of C.C.No.91 of 1981, on a report given by the respondent, the police have filed three separate cases in C.C.Nos.30, 31 and 32 of 1981 and C.C.Nos.30 and 32 of 1981 were tried separately and accused 1 and 2 were acquitted and only the case filed against the third accused in C.C.No.31 of 1981 is not yet disposed of and it is pending. In the meantime, the complainant who is aggrieved by the alleged improper investigation by the Police, filed a private complaint in C.C.No.91 of 1981 in respect of the same subject-matter. The three accused in C.C.No.91 of 1981 filed a petition under Section 300 Criminal Procedure Code contending that the remedy of the complainant in C.C.No.91 of 1981 was to file a revision or appeal against the acquittal and not to file a second complaint and hence it is barred. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition on the ground that C.C.No.31 of 1981 filed against the third accused was not disposed of. Aggrieved against the order of dismissal, accused 1 to 3 filed this revision. 3. Section 300 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code reads as follows: “A person who has once been tried by a Court of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall, while, such conviction or acquittal remains in force, not liable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have been made under sub- section (1) of Section 221, or for which he might have been convicted under sub- section (2) thereof.” 4. It is the admitted case of both parties that in respect of the same occurrence, on a report given by the respondent herein, police have instituted three separate cases in C.C.Nos.30, 31 and 32 of 1981 and that accused 1 and 2 who were tried in C.C.Nos.30 and 32 of 1981 were acquitted and the case filed against the third accused was not tried and disposed of. It is also further admitted that C.C.No.91 of 1981 was filed by the respondent, who was aggrieved by the investigation of the police in respect of the same occurrence and for the same offences. 5. In the light of Section 300(1) Criminal Procedure Code, accused 1 and 2 who were tried for the same incident and same set of facts on a charge-sheet filed by the police in C.C. Nos. 30 and 32 of 1981 cannot be tried again in C.C. No. 91 of 1981 on a private complaint filed by the respondent. The case of the third accused stands on a different footing. The case filed against him in C.C. No.31 of 1981 was not disposed of and he was neither convicted nor acquitted, and hence, so far as the third accused is concerned, it cannot be said that the complaint against him is barred under Section 300, Criminal Procedure Code. 6. In the result, the revision is allowed so far as accused 1 and 2 are concerned and the case filed in C.C.No.91 of 1981 against them is barred under Section 300 Criminal Procedure Code. The revision is dismissed in respect of the third accused. The learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of C.C. No. 31 of 1981 filed against the third accused by the police and C.C. No. 91 of 1981 filed by the respondent herein simultaneously according to law and on merits at an early date as they relate to the year of 1981. R.S.R. ----- Revision allowed as against accused 1 and 2.