K.R. Ramaswamy vs The Inspector of Police

S. Nagamuthu, J.—Seeking a direction to the respondent police to register the complaint of the petitioner dated 30.10.2014, sent to the respondent police and investigate the same in accordance with law, the petitioner has come up with this petition.

The petitioner claims to be the President of an organization known as Tamil Nadu Social Workers Organisation. He has given the present complaint to the respondent police on 30.10.2014. The said complaint reads as follows:-

Dear Sir,

Sub:- Request to register a case against the officers of Police, Law and Order and Traffic of Saidapet Range, Tasildar, Corporation A.E., concern who permitted against the Notification of Corporation which is attached with this complaint for reference under I.P.C., 166 and 217 as per law for deliberate negligence of duty and avoid legal steps.

I, Traffic Ramaswamy, a Senior Citizen and social activist apart from petitioner in digital banner case you have issued C.S.R through my Advocate on 28.10.2014 regarding the same issue along with threat to murder but again the banners were allowed to erect saying the collector has given permission which is unfortunate and punishable one as per law which will be moved on Monday in the Court along with Crl.O.P. No. 27221 of 2014 in the 33rd Court for punishing the erring officials as per P.P request to furnish affidavit by COP how they allowed digital banners on 19.09.2014 to 22.09.2014 in Mylapore and Kamaraj Salai. On these allegations, the petitioner wants a case to be registered.

This Petition has come up today for admission. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and I have also perused the records carefully.

A simple reading of the complaint would go to show that it does not make out any offence at all warranting registration of the case. The petitioner has been moving a number of petitions before this Court for some action or other like registration of criminal cases, direction to the police, etc. But, this complaint does not deserve registration of any case, because, it does not make out any offence at all warranting investigation.

Even on 12.11.2014, two such petitions had been filed before this Court and the same were found to be vexatious. When that was pointed out, the petitioner who appeared in person withdrew the said petitions and he also informed the Court that he would not come up with such vexatious petitions, in future. However, today, again, the petitioner has come up with this petition which is vexatious in nature. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dismiss this petition. While dismissing this petition, this Court thought it fit to impose cost on the petitioner.

But, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner would not hereafter make any such attempt to file such vexatious petitions.

Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is fighting for public cause at times, I am not imposing any cost on the petitioner.

In the result, the Criminal Original Petition fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed.