( 1 ) IN this revision, the complainant has assailed the order of dismissal of the complaint in P. C. R. No. 2451 of 2003 passed by the VIII Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, dated 1-4-2003.

( 2 ) THE case of the complainant in brief is as follows: the famous cine star of Karnataka viz. , Dr. Rajkumar was abducted on the intervening night of 30/31-7-2000 by the notorious forest brigand veerappan and his associates. After the cine star was freed from the clutches of the forest brigand, the then IPS Officer viz. , Sri C. Dinakar wrote and published a book "veerappan's Prize Catch: Rajkumar", which contains the following writings. "15th September, 2000 the media is informed in the morning that Rajkumar was released at 4. 30 a. m. today. Intelligence Chief P. S. Ramanujam rings me at about 10. 00 a. m. to say that Rajkumar has been released. Poor chap. The Intelligence Chief does not know the source of intelligence of his own DGP. He has been tapping all my telephones and mobile phones and reporting to S. M. Krishna, Mallikarjun Kharge and M. B. Prakash about my activities. That man with the dolichocephalic face does not know that I have learnt the police work the hard way instead of writing books and articles like him. Police work is not done with the nib of a pen. It is indeed a crafty game. I am amused when I think of S. M. Krishna, Mallikarjun kharge, M. B. Prakash, P. S. Ramanujam and DIG Jayaprakash. They may be intelligent men but should they underestimate others? May I say, 'every information has a price' (with an apology to the Englishman's adage) there is a law in our country which requires that every commodity sold in the market should have a price tag. Human beings do not have a price tag. The price of human beings has to be bargained. The price paid for Rajkumar is: 1. Rs. 5 crores sent by S. M. Krishna through his son-in-law V. J. Siddartha on two occasions and Rs. 5 crores sent by S. M. Krishna through DIG Jayaprakash. 2. Rs. 1 crore sent by Parvathamma in Chennai and given in m. Karunanidhi's house. 3. Rs. 2 crores handed over personally by Parvathamma to bhanu in her house in Indiranagar, Bangalore. 4. Rs. 2 crores given by the film industry people in M. Karunanidhi's house at Chennai".

( 3 ) BASED on the said writings, the complainant presented a complaint under Section 200 of the Cr. P. C. against the respondents for the offence under Section 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC alleging that the respondents have conspired and actually participated in the conspiracy for the release of the cine star. On the presentation of the complaint, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, referred the matter to the High Ground Police for investigation and report in pursuance of the memo filed by the complainant on 11-2-2003. The inspector of Police, High Ground Police Station submitted a report expressing his inability to register a case either under Section 154 of the cr. P. C. or under Section 156 of the Cr. P. C. on the ground that the complaint did not disclose any criminal offence. After the report was submitted by the Inspector of Police, High Ground Police Station, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, issued notice to the complainant, who appeared before the Court on 31-2-2003 and filed objections with a prayer to reject the report of the Station house Officer and redirect the Station House Officer to investigate the matter under Section 155 (2) of the Cr. P. C. The learned Additional Chief metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, by his order dated 1-4-2003 dismissed the complaint with the reasoning that no sufficient, sustainable and substantial grounds are made out by the complainant to redirect the investigating Officer to investigate the matter. It is this order of dismissal of the complaint which is questioned in the present revision.

( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner Sri F. V. Patil, contended that the complaint i