M BALAMURUGAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TRICHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the petitioners, the respondent police have not registered their complaints, even after a lapse of several months/years. Therefore, they have filed the present petitions before this Court.

(2.) Since the issue involved in the above petitions is one and the same, these petitions are disposed of by this common order. For sake of brevity, facts are being taken from Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6493 of 2018, which read as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted by following the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari V. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [Lalita Kumari-V (unreported order dated 05.02014), the Station House Officer should enquire into the complaint and if any cognizable offence is made out, he/she should register the same within a period of 15 days. The aforesaid dictum has been elaborately discussed by this Court in the decision [Sugesan Transport Pvt. Ltd., rep. by the Director Rejendra Sheth Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, (2016) 5 CTC 577 J-2 Adyar Police Station, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020], wherein, this Court has also specifically given directions to the Station House Officers to scrupulously follow the principles laid down in the Lalita Kumari's case. Hence, the petitioners seek direction to the respondent police to register a case based on their complaints, following the principles laid down in the aforesaid decisions.