KAMALAKANNAN Vs. HOME SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is for a direction to the fourth respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 16.11.2017. The grievance of the petitioner in the complaint is that the top ranking officials of Repco Bank had given a false complaint of misappropriation against him and since he belongs to schedule caste community and also holds the post of General Secretary of the Repco Bank Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe Employees Welfare Association, the top officials of the Bank are liable to be prosecuted for the offences under The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

(2.) Heard Mr.S.Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Iyyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 to 4 as well as Mr.A.Ilangovan, learned counsel for the Intervenor.

(3.) In normal circumstances, this Court would be inclined to direct the jurisdictional Investigating Officer to conduct a preliminary enquiry for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether a cognizable offence has been made out or not and consequentially take a decision on the same. However in the present case, I am constrained to look into few more facts put-forth by the intervenor, who is the representative of the Repco Bank and make the following observations.