ORDER : This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 & 2 to give adequate police protection to construct the house of the petitioner in S.No.14/64 situated in Madathupatti, Kanniyapatti Village, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State and Mr. R. Alagumani, learning counsel for R4. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to by their name. 4. It is the case of Singaram @ Singaravelu (defacto complainant) that he is in possession of the house bearing S.No.14/64 situated in Madathupatti, Kanniyapatti Village, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District and his possession is being threatened by Muthuramalingam / R4 herein. Muthuramalingam / R4 filed a suit in O.S.173 of 2014 before the District Munsif, Pudukkottai against Singaram @ Singaravelu and TNEB for bare injunction, restraining them from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said house property. The said suit was dismissed for default on 06.02.2015. Singaram @ Singaravelu had made an application for electricity connection for the said house with the TANGEDCO. Though TANGEDCO was ready to give electricity connection, since the officials anticipated obstruction from Muthuramalingam, they advised Singaram @ Singaravelu to approach the Court and get police protection and therefore, Singaram @ Singaravelu filed Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7754 of 2015 before this Court for police protection in which, TANGEDCO and Muthuramalingam were shown as respondents. 5. This Court, by order dated 16.07.2015 passed the following order in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7754 of 2015: “4. It is seen that the fifth respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.173 of 2014. The said suit was dismissed for default. An application was filed to restore the same and it is pending consideration. However, there is no interim order as on today. What the petitioner seeks, is only electricity service connection. Therefore, this Court is inclined to direct the second respondent to give police protection to enable the respondents 3 and 4 to give service connection to the petitioner and accordingly, it is ordered. 5. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that this order is passed without prejudice to the contentions of the parties in the civil proceedings including the question of possession.” 6. 5. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that this order is passed without prejudice to the contentions of the parties in the civil proceedings including the question of possession.” 6. Thereafter, when the Police Officials accompanied by TANGEDCO Officials went to provide electricity connection, they found that the said hut was completely dilapidated and therefore, TANGEDCO Officials took the stand that they cannot give electricity connection to such a structure. Singaram @ Singaravelu filed a police complaint alleging that in order to thwart the order passed by this Court for giving police protection for electricity connection, Muthuramalingam and his henchmen had dismantled the hut and taken away the articles found therein on 03.08.2015, when Singaram @ Singaravelu had gone to his brother's death. Since no case was registered on Singaram @ Singaravelu's complaint, Singaram @ Singaravelu approached this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.22436 of 2015 for a direction to the respondent police to register a case on the complaint given by him. Pursuant to the order dated 27.11.2015, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.4 of 2016 against Muthuramalingam for offences under Sections 294(b), 147, 148, 427, 370 (NH) and 506(ii) IPC on 08.01.2016. The Sub-Inspector of Police appears to have conducted investigation in Crime No.4 of 2016 and has filed a closure report before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai on 26.02.2016. 7. Surprisingly, learned counsel appearing for Muthuramalingam has produced a typedset of paper, enclosing the closure report and 161 statement recorded by the Police, which does not even bear the certification by the Court. Learned counsel for Muthuramalingam submitted that Singaram @ Singaravelu had filed a police complaint and the same has been investigated by the Sub-Inspector of Police thoroughly and thereafter, he has filed a closure report. 8. Normally, when a closure report is filed, this Court will not sit in judgment over the correctness of it under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the matter should be left to the Magistrate to entertain the protest application and proceed in accordance with law in terms of the law laid by the Supreme Court in the case of Vinay Tyagi vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in Laws (All)-2010-8-369. In this case, this Court smells rat in the investigation by the Sub-Inspector of Police inasmuch as the Sub-Inspector of Police has not even recorded the statement of the Village Administrative Officer, who has given a certificate to Singaram @ Singaravelu to the effect that he is in possession and occupation of the said house and has been paying tax. That apart, this Court had earlier passed an order in Crl.O.P. (MD) No.7754 of 2015 on 16.07.2015, directing the Police to give protection for getting electricity connection. When the electricity Officials went to the spot, they found that the house has been seriously damaged. These aspects have not been properly looked into by the Sub-Inspector of Police. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that instead of relegating Singaram @ Singaravelu to move the Magistrate Court and file a protest petition, it will serve the interest of justice, if the closure report filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police is set aside and the Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, in whose jurisdiction Vallathirakottai Police Station falls, be directed to conduct a thorough investigation in Crime No.4 of 2016 under the Supervision of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai. 10. Accordingly, while setting aside the closure report filed in Crime No.4 of 2016, the Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, is directed to conduct a thorough investigation in Crime No.4 of 2016 under the Supervision of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai and independently take action in accordance with law. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.