ORDER: This Criminal Original Petition has been brought forth by the de-facto complainant seeking a direction of this Court to the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchendur by setting aside the cognizance taken in C.C.No.144 of 2005 to include the major offences as per the averments found in the final report. 2. It is not in controversy that a case was registered by the respondent police against thirteen accused under Secs.147, 148, 452 , 427 and 506(ii) of I.P.C., read with Sec.3 of TNPPDL Act. The occurrence took place on 21.5.2005. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner /de-facto complainant, out of 13 accused, 10 were arrested and they sought for bail and the other three, who could not be arrested sought for Anticipatory Bail. Both the applications came to be filed before this Court and this Court dismissed all the applications both for Bail and Anticipatory Bail. Such an order was passed by this Court on 20.6.2005. The final report was filed on 29.6.2005 wherein all the non-bailable offences were dropped and immediately all the accused who were denied Bail moved the Judicial Magistrate concerned and got Bail and who denied Anticipatory Bail moved the Court of Sessions concerned and got anticipatory bail. Apart from the filing of the final report, case was taken on cognizance by the Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.144 of 2005, which is pending in that Court. 4. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it was a case where a Durgha was demolished and all the averments in the complaint are clearly attractive of the provisions of non-bailable offences and also under the provision of 3 of TNPPDL Act and the investigating officer has filed the final report dropping non-bailable offences and it has been taken cognizance by the said Court. Under the said circumstances, it is necessary to issue a direction to the Judicial Magistrate concerned to set aside the cognizance taken in C.C.No.144 of 2005 to include the major offences as per the averments found in the final report. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, intervener and also the learned counsel for the State. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case where a direction could be issued to the Judicial Magistrate concerned. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, intervener and also the learned counsel for the State. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case where a direction could be issued to the Judicial Magistrate concerned. Accordingly, the Judicial Magistrate concerned is directed to set aside the cognizance taken in C.C.No.144 of 2005, peruse the materials placed before him and if necessary, may order any further investigation in this matter and not necessary if the materials are sufficient to include the major offences in the proceedings, and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. 7. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Crl.M.P. is also closed. N.S.S.-----Disposed of.