ORDER :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the inaction of the respondent No. 4 in not registering the crime against the accused mentioned in the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated 16.9.2019 and to declare the inaction of the respondent No. 4 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, consequently direct the respondents to follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2014 (1) ALD (Crl.) 159 (SC) : (2014) 2 SCC 1.

2. The petitioner-Dr. Vallabhaneni Vamsi Mohan, is a Member of Legislative Assembly representing Gannavaram Assembly Constituency in Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly. He also floated a charitable institution in the interest of public service and good in the name of "Smt. Vallabhaneni Aruna Charitable Trust" in memory of his mother. With the consistent work and inclination, by doing social work, the petitioner gained and gathered reputation not only in his constituency but also across Krishna District and the State of Andhra Pradesh.

3. Some persons including Byreddy Siddarth Reddy and others are making false allegations, baseless accusations against the petitioner and his family, putting them in constant fear and threat to life. They are also spreading wild allegations against him, threatening him and his family through online public domain forums and social network such as Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter and such other networks. The rumours and wild allegations spreading against him by the aforesaid persons put him and his family in an inconvenient position.

4. Due to the illegal and immoral acts committed by the aforesaid persons, the petitioner lodged a complaint dated 16.9.2019 before respondent No. 2 clearly mentioning about the baseless, defamatory, wild allegations that have been widely circulated on social media with all particulars. He also enclosed the printed copies of the relevant posts from the social media platforms alongwith the said complaint.

5. The petitioner received a letter dated 26.9.2019 from the respondent No. 2 refusing to register a crime against Byreddy Siddarth Reddy and others and the said letter is illegal for the following reasons.

(a) That the letter send by the 2nd respondent is contrary to Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. as the 2nd respondent is bound to set the criminal law into motion against the named accused in the complaint by forwarding the same to the 3rd respondent, concerned police station to take the complaint on file.

(b) The complaint submitted by the petitioner not only discloses information about commission of the offence under Sections 500 and 506 IPC, but also under the penal provisions of information Technology Act.

(c) Whenever the complaint is lodged, disclosing information about commission of cognizable offence, it is the duty of concerned SHO to register a case and if the concerned SHO fails to discharge his statutory obligation under Section 154 clause (1) Cr.P.C., it is the duty of the superior officer either to register a case or direct the concerned SHO to register a case as per the provisions of the Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. and law is well settled relating to the statutory obligation of the police officials.

6. It is further contended that it is the duty of the respondents to register a crime when they received information about the commission of cognizable offence in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (supra), but contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 refused to register a crime for the reasons best known to them. Thereby, the act of the respondents is arbitrary, illegal and requested to grant relief as stated supra.

7. Copy of the complaint lodged with the Commissioner of Police dated 16.9.2019 is placed on record to find out whether the allegations made against the petitioner by Byreddy Siddarth Reddy, Vadlapatla Hari Krishna, Ravi Kumar Muppaneni, Jag