Conducting the domestic enquiry has its own importance on two counts. These are as below.
Firstly, imagine for a while that the company orders a domestic enquiry and tells the accused to depose before it. The accused appears and, in the enquiry, the misconduct of the employee is established. Management tells the employee to refund the money to the company with interest. The accused accepts it and pays also. Therefore, the matter gets settled. Thereafter, whether to pursue the case through civil court is the management's call. No company would be interested in doing that.
What I have written above may sound a little utopian; nevertheless, we must consider it as one of the possibilities.
The second scenario is as below. Suppose in the domestic enquiry the misconduct is proved. However, the court acquits the accused. In that case, should the court verdict override the domestic enquiry? No. Rather, there are higher court verdicts wherein the high court has held that findings of a domestic enquiry override the court ruling. You may check the following link wherein one such verdict is given by the Hon'ble Madras Court:
http://M.M. Rubber Company Ltd. vs P...September 1985
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
You can file an FIR for fraud if it attracts the IPC but not a domestic enquiry (domestic enquiry serves no purpose) since the employer and employee relationship doesn't exist. Now, he is an outsider who has committed fraud when he was an employee.