1. Seeking a direction to the respondent police to register a case on the complaint of the petitioners dated 28.03.2012, they have come up with this petition invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioners made three different complaints on 28.03.2012 separately to the first respondent. The crux of the complaints is one and the same. According to the petitioners, they were working as Teachers in a private school known as ‘St.John’s Senior Secondary School and Junior College (CBSE)’ for some years. At the time when they joined the School as Teachers, the second respondent Management insisted for the production of their original testimonials such as SSLC, +2 Certificate, Degree etc. The same were accordingly submitted by the petitioners to the Management. The petitioners 1 and 3 resigned their job in the year 2010 and the second petitioner resigned her job in the year 2011. After resignation, when the petitioners approached the second respondent Management for return of their original testimonials, they unlawfully declined to return the same. All the efforts made by the petitioners for return of the testimonials proved futile. Ultimately, the petitioners have approached the first respondent with the above individual complaints dated 28.03.2012 for taking action against the school management. But, the first respondent has not taken any action so far. It is in these circumstances, the petitioners have come up with this petition seeking a direction on their complaints.

3. The second respondent has filed a detailed counter wherein, he has admitted that the above certificates of the petitioners are in the custody of the second respondent. But what all that he would state is that at the time when the petitioners entered service in the school, an agreement was reached into between the school Management and the respective Teachers, under which, it was agreed upon that if a Teacher leaves the school in the middle of the academic year then, he has to repay three months salary and only on such payment, he/she will be entitled for the return of all the testimonials. In the counter, it is further stated that in this case, when the petitioners resigned their job, they did not repay the three months salary in terms of the agreement. It is because of that, the above certificates have been retained by the Management. The retention of the certificates by the Management, according to the counter, would not make out any criminal offence warranting registration of a case.

4. I have heard Mr.P.N.Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.M.Maharaja, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Mr.Habibullah Basha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent.

5. Mr.P.N.Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the retention of the certificates of the petitioners by the second respondent Management amounts to unlawful retention which makes out an offence punishable under Section 406 I.P.C., requiring registration of a case by the first respondent police. In order to substantiate the said contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Krishna Kumar, v. Union of India (AIR 1959 SC 1390).

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied on a judgment of this Court in Kesavan v. Director of Medical Education, Kilpauk, Chennai & Another wherein, a learned Single Judge of this Court has taken the view that even the University cannot retain the certificates of an individual based on a bond.

7. But, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent would vehemently oppose this petition. According to him, as per the terms of the agreement, the petitioners are bound to repay their three months salary. If only they make such payment, they would be entitled for return of such certificates. Since, the petitioners have not repaid the amount in te