Supreme Court guidelines on Registration of FIR, including action against officers who don’t register FIR of a cognizable offence.
1. What is FIR?
First Information Report (FIR) is the earliest account of the commission of a cognizable offence given to the police, recorded under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973. It is usually based on a complaint received by the Police from an Informer or a Complainant or an Aggrieved person.
The FIR sets the criminal law in motion and forms the basis for police investigation. Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of CrPC (The Code of Criminal Procedure) on commission of a cognizable offence.
1.1 Who Can File an FIR?
Any person (victim, witness, or even a passer-by) who has knowledge of a cognizable offence may file an FIR. The complainant need not be the victim. In cases of cognizable offences, the police are duty-bound to register the FIR once information is received.
1.2 FIR for Cognizable offence, Non-cognizable offence and Zero FIR
a) FIR for Cognizable offences: In cognizable offences (like murder, rape, kidnapping, theft, etc.) police can register a FIR and begin investigation without prior approval from a magistrate.
b) FIR for Non-Cognizable offences (NC report): In case of non-cognizable offences like defamation, public nuisance, minor assault, etc. police cannot investigate or arrest without magistrate’s permission.
c) Zero FIR: An FIR that can be registered at any police station, regardless of jurisdiction. It is later transferred to the appropriate police station as per jurisdiction. Though it is not explicitly mentioned in CrPC / BNSS but has been upheld by practice and judicial interpretation (e.g., State of Andhra Pradesh v. Punati Ramulu, AIR 1993 SC 2644).
2. Legal Provisions: Registration of FIR
2.1 Section 154 CrPC (The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)
Section 154 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
154. Information in cognisable cases.
(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognisable offence, if given orally to an officer-in-charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.
[Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, [section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB,] [Inserted by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013] section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer:
Provided further that-
(a) in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, [section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB,] [Substituted 'section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D,' by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 (22 of 2018), dated 11.8.2018.] section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient place of such person's choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;
(b) the recording of such information shall be video-graphed;
(c) the police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Judicial Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (5A) of section 164 as soon as possible.]
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant.
(3) Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer-in-charge of a police station to record the information referred to in sub-section (1) may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognisable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer-in-charge of the police station in relation to that offence.
2.2 Section 173 BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023)
Section 173 in Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
173. Information in cognizable cases.
(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station, and if given-
(i) orally, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it;
(ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf:
Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68, section 69, section 70, section 71, section 74, section 75, section 76, section 77, section 78, section 79 or section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is alleged to have been committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer:
Provided further that-
(a) in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68, section 69, section 70, section 71, section 74, section 75, section 76, section 77, section 78, section 79 or section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is alleged to have been committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient place of such person's choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;
(b) the recording of such information shall be videographed;
(c) the police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (6) of section 183 as soon as possible.
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant or the victim.
(3) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in section 175, on receipt of information relating to the commission of any cognizable offence, which is made punishable for three years or more but less than seven years, the officer in charge of the police station may with the prior permission from an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, considering the nature and gravity of the offence,-
(i) proceed to conduct preliminary enquiry to ascertain whether there exists a prima facie case for proceeding in the matter within a period of fourteen days; or
(ii) proceed with investigation when there exists a prima facie case.
(4) Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record the information referred to in sub-section (1), may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Sanhita, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence failing which such aggrieved person may make an application to the Magistrate.
[Similar to Section 154 from Old CrPC-Also Refer]
3. Procedure for Registration of FIR
Under Section 173(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (previously Section 154 of CrPC), when information about a cognizable offence is received by a police officer in charge of a police station, they are legally bound to reduce it to writing, have it read over to the informant, and obtain their signature.
The FIR is then recorded in the station diary and a free copy is given to the informant. If the crime occurred outside the station’s jurisdiction, the FIR must still be registered and forwarded to the police station with territorial jurisdiction — a process commonly known as Zero FIR.
For non-cognizable offences, police must seek Magistrate’s approval before investigating. If police refuse to register an FIR, the informant may approach senior officers or the Magistrate under Section 174(3) BNSS.
This process ensures transparency and accountability in the criminal justice system.
4. Time Limits, Delays in Registration of FIR
There is no statutory time limit prescribed under Indian law for registering a First Information Report (FIR). However, unexplained or unreasonable delays in filing an FIR can raise doubts about the authenticity of the complaint. This principle was laid down in the landmark case of Thulia Kali v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1973 SC 501, where the Supreme Court held that delayed reporting without justification may affect the evidentiary value of the case.
Importantly, in cases involving cognizable offences—those serious enough to warrant immediate police action—the police are legally obligated to register an FIR immediately upon receiving information that discloses the commission of such an offence. This mandate was reinforced in Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P., (2014) 2 SCC 1, where the Supreme Court ruled that registration of FIR is mandatory in all cognizable cases.
5. When Police refuses to register FIR
When the police refuse to register a First Information Report (FIR) for a cognizable offence, it constitutes a violation of statutory and constitutional duties. Under Section 173(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (earlier Section 154 CrPC), police are mandated to register an FIR when information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. This duty was affirmed in the Supreme Court’s judgment in Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P., (2014) 2 SCC 1, which held that registration is mandatory, and preliminary inquiry is allowed only in limited exceptional cases.
If the police refuses to register an FIR, the informant has the following legal remedies:
- Approach a senior police officer (e.g., Superintendent of Police) under Section 173(3), BNSS.
- File a complaint before a Judicial Magistrate under Section 175(2) read with Section 193, BNSS (earlier 156(3) CrPC), requesting directions to the police to investigate.
- File a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court for enforcement of fundamental rights, especially in serious or urgent matters.
Police refusal often leads to delayed justice or denial of access to remedies. The legal framework is designed to prevent such refusals and ensure accountability.
6. Supreme Court Judgments – Registration of FIR
Through various judgments the Supreme Court of India has provided specific guidelines on the registration of FIR (First Information Report), emphasizing the importance of timely and mandatory registration of FIRs in cases involving cognisable offences.
6.1 Genuineness of Information is Not a Condition for Registration of FIR
In Ramesh Kumari vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors., 2006 (2) SCC 677 the Supreme Court observed-
"Genuineness or otherwise of the information can only be considered after registration of the case. Genuineness or credibility of the information is not a condition precedent for registration of a case."
6.2 Supreme Court Guidelines – Registration of FIR
In Lalita Kumari vs Govt. of U.P. & Others – W.P. (Crl) 68 of 2008, a 5 Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court stipulated specific guidelines for registration of FIR. In fact this judgment is one of the most significant rulings of the Apex Court on the subject of registration of FIRs.
The Court held that:
i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.
ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.
iii) If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.
iv) The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.
v) The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.
vi) As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is to be conducted will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.
The category of cases in which preliminary inquiry may be made are as under:
a) Matrimonial disputes/ family disputes
b) Commercial offences
c) Medical negligence cases
d) Corruption cases
e) Cases where there is abnormal delay/laches in initiating criminal prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay in reporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining the reasons for delay.
The aforesaid are only illustrations and not exhaustive of all conditions which may warrant preliminary inquiry.
vii) While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time bound and in any case it should not exceed 7 days. The fact of such delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry.
viii) Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is the record of all information received in a police station, we direct that all information relating to cognizable offences, whether resulting in registration of FIR or leading to an inquiry, must be mandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said Diary and the decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also be reflected, as mentioned above.
The Supreme Court further said-
In view of various counter claims regarding registration or non-registration, what is necessary is only that the information given to the police must disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. In such a situation, registration of an FIR is mandatory. However, if no cognizable offence is made out in the information given, then the FIR need not be registered immediately and perhaps the police can conduct a sort of preliminary verification or inquiry for the limited purpose of ascertaining as to whether a cognizable offence has been committed. But, if the information given clearly mentions the commission of a cognizable offence, there is no other option but to register an FIR forthwith. Other considerations are not relevant at the stage of registration of FIR, such as, whether the information is falsely given, whether the information is genuine, whether the information is credible etc. These are the issues that have to be verified during the investigation of the FIR. At the stage of registration of FIR, what is to be seen is merely whether the information given ex facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. If, after investigation, the information given is found to be false, there is always an option to prosecute the complainant for filing a false FIR.