The court issued the directive while allowing a contempt petition against a police inspector from the city but let him off with a stern caution to be more diligent in future.
The order by Justice T Mathivanan was issued on October 30 days before the November 12 order of the Supreme Court that registration of FIR by police in cognisable offence is a must and action must be taken against officials for not lodging a case on the complaint filed in such offences.
He observed that at least after the aggrieved party approaches the court, police officials should become vigil and discharge their duties.
Even then, if such officials were not performing their dutiful functions as required by law, such kind of an recalcitrant attitude, cannot be digested and it shall not be allowed to be encouraged, the Judge said.
Petitioner G.Rikhabchand, a pawn shop owner, has complained against Inspector Karunakaran for failure to implement the court's March 16, 2012 order directing the police to register his September 2009 complaint that a head constable had taken away 203.73 grams of gold jewels under the guise of recovery of stolen jewellery.
However, in view of pendency of the cheating case against the head constable and the then station incharge, it would be better in the interest of justice, as urged by the Public Prosecutor, that the contemnor may be admonished with a stern caution, he ruled in the order, made available today.
