If information given to the police discloses a cognizable offence but the police station refuses to record it, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides further statutory remedies. The complainant may escalate the matter to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS and, where necessary, approach the competent Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS.
A police complaint and an FIR are not necessarily the same thing. The legal consequences depend upon whether the information supplied discloses a cognizable offence.
Section 173 BNSS governs information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence. Information may be given to the officer in charge of a police station irrespective of the area where the offence was committed, including through electronic communication subject to the statutory requirements.
If the officer in charge refuses to record the information, the complainant is not left without a remedy. Section 173(4) BNSS specifically provides a statutory escalation mechanism.
The next legal step should depend upon the nature of the allegations, the offence disclosed, the documents available and what action the police have already taken.
Under the present BNSS framework, following the statutory sequence is particularly important before approaching the Magistrate.
Give complete information regarding the cognizable offence to the officer in charge of the police station and preserve proof of submission or acknowledgement wherever available.
If the officer in charge refuses to record the information, send the substance of the information in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned in accordance with Section 173(4) BNSS.
If the statutory police remedy does not resolve the matter, an application supported by affidavit may be made before the competent Magistrate seeking an order for investigation, subject to the requirements of Section 175(3).
Section 173 governs information relating to the commission of cognizable offences. The section also recognises information given by electronic communication subject to the statutory procedure.
Where the officer in charge refuses to record the information, the aggrieved person may send the substance of the information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned. If the Superintendent is satisfied that the information discloses a cognizable offence, the Superintendent shall investigate the case himself or direct investigation by a subordinate police officer.
A Magistrate empowered under Section 210 may, after considering the application supported by an affidavit made under Section 173(4), making such inquiry as considered necessary and considering the submission of the police officer, order investigation.
The BNSS has introduced important procedural safeguards that must be complied with before an order for investigation is sought.
Under the present Section 175(3) procedure, approaching the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) is not merely a formality to be ignored.
The Supreme Court has explained that the prior Section 173(4) application is mandatory for a Section 175(3) application. A copy of that application must accompany the Magistrate application, which must also be supported by an affidavit.
The Magistrate may make such inquiry as considered necessary and must consider the submission made by the police officer regarding the refusal before deciding whether investigation should be ordered.
Set out the date, place, persons involved, specific acts, offence alleged, witnesses and supporting evidence in chronological order.
Submit the complaint to the appropriate police authority and preserve acknowledgement, CSR, postal proof, email or other proof showing submission.
Keep details of any CSR issued, inquiry conducted, police communication, refusal or absence of action.
If the officer in charge refuses to record the information, send the substance of the complaint in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned under Section 173(4).
Keep the representation, postal receipt, tracking proof, acknowledgement and supporting documents. These can become important when seeking the Magistrate's intervention.
Where appropriate, prepare an application before the competent Magistrate supported by the required affidavit and enclosing the prior Section 173(4) application and supporting materials.
The Magistrate may conduct such inquiry as considered necessary and consider the police officer's submission before deciding whether to direct investigation.
The Magistrate will decide the application according to the allegations, supporting material, police response and applicable law. Filing an application does not automatically guarantee an FIR.
A CSR or complaint acknowledgement ordinarily records receipt of the complaint. It should not automatically be treated as equivalent to registration of an FIR.
Where the information discloses a cognizable offence but no FIR has been registered, the complainant should examine what inquiry has been undertaken, what communication has been received and whether the statutory escalation procedure should be invoked.
The CSR number and acknowledgement can be important evidence of when the complaint was submitted and what allegations were placed before the police.
The FIR route discussed on this page concerns information relating to a cognizable offence.
For a non-cognizable offence, Section 174 BNSS provides a different procedure. Police ordinarily cannot investigate a non-cognizable case without an order of a competent Magistrate.
Where a case involves two or more offences and at least one is cognizable, Section 174(4) provides that the case is deemed to be a cognizable case.
Allegations involving deception and dishonest inducement require careful examination of the intention and facts from the beginning of the transaction.
Entrustment and dishonest misappropriation allegations require specific factual and documentary analysis.
Alleged fabrication or use of false documents may require police, forensic and documentary investigation depending upon the facts.
Trespass, forged documents, fraudulent transactions and other property-related allegations may contain both civil and criminal issues.
The exact words, circumstances, intention and surrounding evidence must be examined to determine the applicable criminal provisions.
Online fraud, impersonation, account compromise and electronic transactions often require prompt preservation of digital and banking evidence.
Where information discloses a cognizable offence and the officer in charge refuses to record it, Section 173(4) BNSS provides for sending the substance of the information in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned.
Section 173(4) BNSS provides the statutory remedy where the officer in charge refuses to record information relating to a cognizable offence.
Yes. Subject to compliance with the statutory requirements, Section 175(3) BNSS permits an application before the competent Magistrate seeking an order for investigation.
Yes. Under the current BNSS framework, the prior Section 173(4) application is an important mandatory requirement before invoking Section 175(3) before the Magistrate.
Yes. Section 175(3) expressly refers to an application supported by an affidavit made under Section 173(4).
No. A CSR or complaint acknowledgement ordinarily records receipt of the complaint. The FIR number and registration status should be separately verified.
Whether a matter is purely civil or also discloses a criminal offence depends upon the allegations and ingredients of the alleged offence. The existence of a civil remedy does not by itself answer that question.
Section 174 BNSS applies to non-cognizable cases. The police procedure and Magistrate's role differ from a cognizable case.
A private complaint before the Magistrate is a separate procedural route. Whether that route or a Section 175(3) application is appropriate depends upon the facts and whether police investigation is required.
No. The Magistrate considers the application, affidavit, prior Section 173(4) representation, police submission and any inquiry considered necessary before deciding the application.
Keep your original complaint, CSR or acknowledgement, supporting documents and proof of police submission ready. The next step may involve a Section 173(4) BNSS representation to the Superintendent of Police and, where legally appropriate, a Section 175(3) BNSS application before the Magistrate.
Advocate J.N. Naresh Kumar, M.L. (Hons.)
Door No. 65/1, Jani Jhan Khan Road,
Royapettah, Chennai – 600014
Mobile: 77083 00960
For police refusal to register FIR, CSR complaints, Section 173(4) BNSS representations, Section 175(3) Magistrate petitions or private complaint advice, select an available consultation slot.
Book AppointmentThis page provides general legal information. Whether an FIR is required, whether the alleged offence is cognizable, and whether a Magistrate should order investigation depend upon the allegations, statutory ingredients, available evidence and compliance with the applicable BNSS procedure.