Judgment :- 1. All these Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to direct the Station House Officer to register cases on the complaints given by the petitioners and to prosecute the accused in accordance with law. 2. According to the petitioners in these petitions, though complaints submitted by them to the respective Station House Officers prima-facie disclose commission of cognizable offence, yet the Station House Officers failed to register their case. Therefore, they come forward with these Criminal Original Petitions. 3. Similar issue arises for consideration before the Full Bench of High Court of Bombay in the matter of Panchabhai Popotbhai Butani and others v. State of Maharastra and others reported in 2010 CIJ 63 FBJ. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Swatanter Kumar, Chief Justice (as the Hon’ble Judge then was) has spoken for the Bench. The Full Bench of the Bombay High Court has considered the said issue in detail and held that - "It is primary duty of the police to immediately register an F.I.R. and to investigate the matter in accordance with law and not to push any individual to knock the doors of the Courts for inquiry, investigation and trial of an office. Seeking directions from Magistrate to direct police to investigate are the events which should take place as a last measure.” It has been further held that if the concerned police does not register the case based on the complaint, the provisions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. can be invoked by the concerned person. 4. In State of Maharashtra v. S.S. Chavan reported in (2011 (3) MLJ(Crl) 205 (SC), a similar issue arise for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court and it has been held that – “the legal position is well settled that on information being lodged with the police and if the said information discloses the commission of a cognizable office, the police shall record the same in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Police Officer’s power to investigate in case of a cognizable offence without order of the Magistrate is statutorily recognized under Section 156 Cr.P.C. Thus the police officer in charge of a police station, on the basis of information received or otherwise, can start investigation if he has reasons to suspect the Commission of any cognizable offence.” 5. Police Officer’s power to investigate in case of a cognizable offence without order of the Magistrate is statutorily recognized under Section 156 Cr.P.C. Thus the police officer in charge of a police station, on the basis of information received or otherwise, can start investigation if he has reasons to suspect the Commission of any cognizable offence.” 5. A Single Bench of this Court in the decision G. Arokiya Marie v. Superintendent of Police reported in 2008 Cri.L.J. 4257 (Madras) has considered the scope of Sections 154(3), 190 read with 156(3) and 200 Cr.P.C. and held that the aggrieved persons, who complain of the commission of offences of lesser gravity than offences like murder, rape, dowry death under Penal Code and the offences under the other Acts, shall resort to the above provisions and the inherent jurisdiction shall not be invoked in those cases to redress their grievance, for alternative remedy as above is very much available. 6. The Single Judge Bench in the above decision has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Aleque Padamsee and others v. Union of India and others reported in (2007 Cri.L.J. 3729), wherein it has been held – “The Correct position in law, therefore, is that the police officials ought to register the FIR whenever facts brought to its notice shown that cognizable offence has been made out. In case the police officials fail to do so, the modalities to be adopted are as set out in Sections 190 read with Section 200 of the Code.” 7. The respective counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the complaints given by the respective petitioners, prima-facie disclose commission of cognizable offences and though with regard to the non-registration of the case, has been brought to the notice of the Superior Officers, yet the concerned Station House Officers have not taken steps to register the case and consequently, the accused in these cases continue to harass/intimidate the complainants. 8. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) on instruction submitted that when the complaints prima-facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences, suitable advise will be given to the concerned Station House Officers to register the cases and take further steps in this regard. 9. 8. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) on instruction submitted that when the complaints prima-facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences, suitable advise will be given to the concerned Station House Officers to register the cases and take further steps in this regard. 9. In the light of the factual position, coupled with the ratios laid down in the above decisions, this court directs the Station House Officers concerned to go through the contents of the complaints and if it disclose commission of cognizable offences, they are duty bound to register the First Information Report, investigate the same in accordance with law and file final reports. It is needless to say that if the concerned Station House Officers failed to exercise the statutory duty cast upon them, it is always open to the petitioners to invoke Sections 154(3) Cr.P.C. or 156(3) Cr.P.C. or work out their further remedy, in accordance with law. 10. The Criminal Original Petitions are disposed of with the above directions. Consequently, connected M.Ps. are closed.