The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Special Court under the SC/ST Act has the power to take cognizance of offences directly for the purpose of providing a speedy trial, but it does not have the authority to conduct inquiries or investigations in all private complaints.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.to set aside the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P. No.654 of 2021 dated 20.01.2021.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai, directing a report from the Commissioner of Police relating to the complaint dated 17.05.2019 is just and reasonable for filing a status or final report on the complaint within two months.

2.a. Originally a complaint has been filed before the Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai, who is also holding the power under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as SC/ST Act), to direct the competent authority first Respondent to register and investigate the complaint of the Petitioner/Respondent herein dated 17.05.2019 in accordance with law and direct them to file a Final Report under SC/ST Act. The said Petition was filed for mere direction. The crux of the allegation in that petition and affidavit to the effect that the Respondent said to be a practicing advocate and he is campaigning the cause of human rights. One Mr S.R.G. Dayal, Inspector of Police(4th Petitioner herein), with the help of Sub-Inspector of Police Mr. Karthik, has involved in various corrupt practices and with the support of Kanja peddlers, had conducted the “Katta Panchayat” (Kangaru Courts) against which the Respondent has sent a complaint to the higher officials. His complaint was enquired by one Mr.Hari Kumar, former Commissioner and he observed that the Respondent is doing such Kangaru Courts and also stated that there are pending cases against the Respondent in K-6 T.P.Chatram and K-4 Anna Nagar Police Stations. According to the Respondent, such finding by Mr. Harikumar made with motive and similarly he has also raised certain issues against certain police officials. To thwart such applications of complaint against the police officials, the police with the help of some six witnesses have created a false case against him and created documents and maligned the Respondent's reputation, observing that the Respondent is habitual notorious rowdy element. He frequently disturbs the Pubic Peace of tranquility. He creates Law and Order problem in K6 Police Station Limit. Therefore, recommended to open a history sheet against the Respondent.

2.b. According to the Respondent, the Petitioners have created history sheet with motive and it is stated by the Petitioners that various cases are pending against the Respondent which are as follows:

According to the Respondent history sheet cannot be filed against him. Creation of such history sheet violates the fundamental rights of the Respondent and it also amounts to atrocities under SC/ST Act. Hence, sought action against the Petitioners under Section 120-B, 267, 193, 196, 198, 199, 201, 211, 469 and 471 of I.P.C.and sought a direction to register the FIR and investigate the complaint of the petitioner dated 17.05.2019. Based on the above complaint the Special Court directed the Commissioner of Police calling for status report or final report on the complaint within two months which has been challenged by the State.

3. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petition has been filed just like a 482 Cr.P.C.Petition before the Sessions Court for direction to register an FIR which is not permissible under law. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that though the Special Court has original jurisdiction to take cognizance of