AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 195 wordsMohan M. Shantanagoudar, J.—Learned Government Advocate takes notice for respondents 1 to 4.
Notice to respondents 5 and 6 is not necessary since the order to be passed will not affect them.
The sum and substance of the prayer of the petitioner is that he needs the complaint filed by him at Annexures-G, H and K, dated 25.11.2012, 25.11.2012 and 30.12.2012 respectively be investigated into as per law.
The complaints are lodged just about three weeks back. They will be investigated into as per law. It is not open for the petitioner to presume that police will not investigate into them. The petitioner should not have rushed to this Court immediately after lodging the information. He should have waited for some period to facilitate the police to investigate into the allegations as per law. It seems, complaints are also lodged against the petitioner as is clear from Annexure-J.
Be that as it may, the complaints if any, filed by the petitioner or against the petitioner shall be investigated into by the jurisdictional police as per law and necessary report shall be filed before the concerned Courts.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands dismissed.