Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first Respondent vehemently objected to the line of argument of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners stating that the FIR is not an encyclopedia. The ingredients of the offences are made out. It is for the Investigation Officer to collect the materials necessarily to proceed with the investigation. Here in this case, as per the contents of the FIR, the occurrence had taken place in Singapore.

13.The objections of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the FIR is not an encyclopedia and after collecting the materials by the Investigation Officer, whether the ingredients of the offences are attracted or whether the occurrence took place in India are to be considered cannot at all be considered in the facts and circumstances of the case. Even though it is an accepted fact that the FIR is not an encyclopedia, here as per the contents of the FIR with regard to the alleged misappropriation of the Company's amount by the first Petitioner's son, Rajunarayanan, the occurrence had not taken place in India. It was all in Singapore and the first Petitioner's son, Rajunarayanan had already left to India from Singapore. Therefore, the Respondent Police had registered the case in India. That will not hold good.