Smt. Sharada and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[mohan shantanagoudar j.] these writ petitions are filed under articles 226 & 227 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents 1 to 4 in general and the 4th respondent in particular to forthwith register the complaint dated 25.1.2010 vide annexure-d and etc.order1. petitioners have sought for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 in general and 4th respondent in particular to register the complaint dated 25.1.2010 vide annexure-'d' and investigate into the offences complained of therein. they have also sought for a direction to the effect that the 5th respondent neither should nor investigate into the crime and some other police officer should investigate into the crime.2. the petitioners have lodged a complaint as per annexure-'d' dated 25 1.2010 before the commissioner of police, bangalore, making certain allegations against respondent no.6 herein. the grievance of the petitioners is that the said complaint is not registered and consequently. the complaint has to be filed before the petitioners could not have not investigated into approached the commissioner of police directly. the petitioner no.2 had lodged the complaint against the 6' respondent and two others and the same is registered in crime no.413/2009 for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 504, 506 r/w. section 34 of ipc. this it self goes to show that the complaints filed in the jurisdictional police station are being registered if the complaint discloses the cognizable offence. it is relevant to note that the 6th respondent had lodged the complaint against the petitioner no. 11 and 5th respondent herein and the same is registered in crime no.143/2010 for the offences punishable under sections 323 and 506 r/w. section 34 of ipc.4. be that as it may,, if the petitioners are still interested to file the complaint against any person, they can do so by filing the complaint before the jurisdictional police. if the complaint discloses cognizable offence, the same will be inquired into by the 5th respondent in accordance with law. as aforementioned, even the 6th respondent had lodged the complaint against the 5th respondent. that itself goes to show that the 6th respondent is also not happy with the 5th respondent. all these facts clearly reveal that certain false allegations are made against the 5 respondent.5. be that as it may, since it is open for the petitioners to lodge information in accordance with law before the jurisdictional police, they can do so in accordance with law. if such a complaint is lodged and if the complaint discloses cognizable offence, the 5th respondent-inspector shall proceed in accordance with law.writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Petitioners have sought for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 in general and 4th respondent in particular to register the complaint dated 25.1.2010 vide Annexure-'D' and investigate into the offences complained of therein. They have also sought for a direction to the effect that the 5th respondent neither should nor investigate into the crime and some other police officer should investigate into the crime.

2. The petitioners have lodged a complaint as per Annexure-'D' dated 25 1.2010 before the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore, making certain allegations against respondent No.6 herein. The grievance of the petitioners is that the said complaint is not registered and consequently. The complaint has to be filed before the petitioners could not have not investigated into approached the Commissioner of Police directly. The petitioner No.2 had lodged the complaint against the 6' respondent and two others and the same is registered in Crime No.413/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. This it self goes to show that the complaints filed in the jurisdictional police station are being registered if the complaint discloses the cognizable offence. It is relevant to note that the 6th respondent had lodged the complaint against the petitioner No. 11 and 5th respondent herein and the same is registered in Crime No.143/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.

4. Be that as it may,, if the petitioners are still interested to file the complaint against any person, they can do so by filing the complaint before the jurisdictional police. If the complaint discloses cognizable offence, the same will be inquired into by the 5th respondent in accordance with law. As aforementioned, even the 6th respondent had lodged the complaint against the 5th respondent. That itself goes to show that the 6th respondent is also not happy with the 5th respondent. All these facts clearly reveal that certain false allegations are made against the 5 respondent.

5. Be that as it may, since it is open for the petitioners to lodge information in accordance with law before the jurisdictional police, they can do so in accordance with law. If such a complaint is lodged and if the complaint discloses cognizable offence, the 5th respondent-Inspector shall proceed in accordance with law.

Writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.