REMIA Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE TANUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Regarding the death of one Sulaiman, a complaint has been filed by his mother, widow and brother before the Sub Inspector of Police, Tanur (in Malappuram District). In the complaint it is specifically mentioned that they suspect one Ali to have murdered Sulaiman on 21-6-1992 at Sharjah in United Arab Emirates. Ext. P3 complaint, according to the petitioners, was not accepted by the Sub Inspector of Police on the ground that that the alleged offence was committed outside India. Petitioners have, therefore, filed this Original Petition for directing the aforesaid Sub Inspector to prepare an FIR and register the crime on the basis of Ext. P3 complaint and to commence investigation.

(2.) Learned Government Pleader contended that the Sub Inspector of Police has justification because no police in this State can enquire into the offence committed beyond the territories of India.

(3.) S.177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') says that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. The said section, no doubt, deals with inquiries and trials and does not deal with investigation. Even otherwise, the provision envisages only the general principle which is subject to exceptions. It is clear from the provision itself since the section employs the words "shall ordinarily" (vide Nikka Singh v. The State, AIR 1952 Punj. 186). Supreme Court also observed that with the use of the word "ordinarily" the provision has to be understood as "except as otherwise provided in the Code or special law", (vide Narumal v. State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 1329 ).