M JAMAL MYDEEN Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to direct the respondents to register a case, on the basis of the petitioner's complaint, dated 18.10.2016, against (1) Thiru. Raja Murali, Inspector of Police (Law and Order), B-5 Police Station, South Gate, Madurai; (2) Tamilselvan, Sub-Inspector of Police (Law and Order), B-5 Police Station, South Gate, Madurai; (3) Thiru Partha Sarathi of ADMK 67th Ward Secretary and (4) Dhilip Kumar, Gang Leader.

(2.) The crux of the complaint, dated 18.10.2016 is that Thiru Parthasarathi along with one Thiru. Dhilip Kumar used to sell the illicit arrack by filling it in the Brandy Bottles between 9.30 p.m., and 12.00 p.m., and he informed the above to the said Inspector of Police and Sub-Inspector of Police, B-5 Police Station, South Gate, Madurai. It is further alleged that even informing the above to the said Police officials, no appropriate action has been taken against the said Partha Sarathi, since they are receiving the bribe of Rs.1000/- and Rs.200/- respectively on daily basis from the said Partha Sarathi.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the attitude of the said Police Officials / accused acted in lethargic manner and without responsibility of their public duty by getting a sum of Rs.1000/- and Rs.200/- respectively from the said Partha Sarathi, who was a notorious rowdy element and except no other option, the petitioner has preferred a complaint before the second respondent Police, in person, but no effective steps have been taken by the respondent Police and hence, once again the petitioner has preferred a complaint before the respondent Police through RPAD, dated 18.10.2016 and even after receiving the same, the respondent police failed to take effective action and hence, the petitioner with no other option has approached this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., directing the respondents to register a case against the accused persons, on the basis of the complaint, dated 18.10.2016, given by the petitioner herein.