Criminal investigation - Preliminary enquiry – General Diary - Preliminary enquiry and the consequent Source Report filed by the Officer were done without entering the same in the General Diary  - The absence of entries in the General Diary concerning the preliminary enquiry would not be per se illegal -  Non­maintenance of General Diary may have consequences on the merits of the case, which is a matter of trial  - Our attention is not drawn to any bar under any provision of CrPC barring investigating authority to investigate into matter, which may for some justifiable ground, not found to have been entered in the General Diary right after receiving the Confidential Information - Held, as the concept of maintaining General Diary has its origin under the Section 44 of Police Act of 1861 as applicable to States, which makes it an obligation for the concerned Police Officer to maintain a General Diary, but such non­ maintenance per se may not be rendering the whole prosecution illegal - However, on the other hand, we are aware of the fact that such non­maintenance of General Diary may have consequences on the merits of the case, which is a matter of trial - The explanation of the genesis of a criminal case, in some cases, plays an important role in establishing the prosecution’s case -  That the binding conclusions reached in the paragraph 120.8 of Lalitha Kumari, (2014) 2 SCC 1 is an obligation of best efforts for the concerned officer to record all events concerning an enquiry - If the Officer has not recorded, then it is for the trial court to weigh the effect of the same for reasons provided therein - A court under a writ jurisdiction or under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court is ill equipped to answer such questions of facts - Police Act, 1861  Section 44. Held,  Our conclusion herein is strengthened by the fact that CrPC itself has differentiated between irregularity and illegality. The obligation of maintenance of General Diary is part of course of conduct of the concerned officer, which may not itself have any bearing on the criminal trial unless some grave prejudice going to the root of matter is shown to exist at the time of the trial. Conspicuous absence of any provision under CrPC concerning the omissions and errors during investigation also bolsters the conclusion reached herein. Moreover, the requirement of the preliminary enquiry is well established by judicial precedents as a check on mushrooming false prosecution against public servants by persons who misuse the process of law for their personal vengeance. Such preliminary check would be beneficial and has been continuously approved by catena of judgments of this Court. (2018)2 SCeJ 1212