A woman in Jaipur walks into the local police station at 02:14 IST after a chain-snatching outside her gate. The duty officer logs a “GD entry”, not an FIR. Two days later, when she follows up, he says “the FIR will be registered after preliminary inquiry”. He is wrong on the law. Under the Supreme Court's binding Constitution-Bench ruling in Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP (2014) 2 SCC 1, an FIR must be registered the moment information disclosing a cognizable offence is received. Chain-snatching is a cognizable offence under BNS 2024 §304 (snatching) — no inquiry, no GD-only logging, no “we will investigate first”. The gap between (a) what a real FIR is, (b) what an NCR (Non-Cognizable Report) is, and © what a private complaint to a magistrate is — is the single biggest source of citizen confusion in the BNSS era. This guide is the decision tree.
Quick answer (60 seconds) — Cognizable offence (theft, snatching, rape, kidnap, cheating, hurt with weapon, riot) → FIR under BNSS §173 (was CrPC §154), police must register immediately, no permission needed to arrest or investigate. Non-cognizable offence (simple hurt, defamation, mischief below threshold, criminal trespass below threshold) → NCR under BNSS §174 (was CrPC §155), police record + refer you to a private complaint under BNSS §223 (was §200) before a magistrate, magistrate alone can order investigation under BNSS §175(3).
Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS) that replaced the CrPC 1973 from 1 July 2024, a citizen seeking redress for a crime is routed through one of three doors:
Which door is correct depends on (a) the character of the offence (cognizable vs non-cognizable, per BNSS Schedule I), and (b) the facts (police refusal, magistrate's discretion under §175(3)).
An FIR is the first information in time and content about the commission of a cognizable offence, given to the officer in charge of a police station, which sets the criminal-investigation engine in motion. BNSS §173(1) (replacing CrPC §154) requires:
Cognizable offences include BNS 2024 §103 (murder), §109 (attempt to murder), §115 (causing hurt by dangerous means), §137 (kidnap / abduction), §63-§79 (sexual offences), §303 (theft), §304 (snatching), §309 (robbery), §310 (dacoity), §315-§318 (criminal breach of trust + cheating in higher categories), §319(2) (cheating by personation), and many more.
The Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP (2014) 2 SCC 1 held that registration of FIR is mandatory under §154 CrPC (now §173 BNSS) if the information discloses a cognizable offence. The court permitted a preliminary inquiry only in narrow exceptional cases (matrimonial / family dispute, commercial offence, medical negligence, corruption, abnormal delay) — and only for a maximum of 15 days (extended to 6 weeks in some categories).
An NCR (Non-Cognizable Report) under BNSS §174 (was CrPC §155) is the police record-entry for offences where the police cannot arrest without warrant and cannot investigate without a magistrate's order.
Common non-cognizable offences:
The NCR procedure:
The Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari (2014) clarified that NCR is not a substitute for FIR when the offence is cognizable. Many police stations wrongly issue NCRs for cognizable offences to slow case-load; that is a violation of §173 BNSS.
A private complaint under BNSS §223 (was CrPC §200) is a complaint made directly to the magistrate alleging the commission of an offence. It is the correct route for:
The procedure under BNSS §223 + §225 + §227:
The Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of UP (2015) 6 SCC 287 required that a §156(3) CrPC (now §175(3) BNSS) application be supported by an affidavit, and that the magistrate must apply mind before directing investigation. This is to curb the misuse of “instant police inquiry” via the magistrate route.
| Dimension | FIR (BNSS §173) | NCR (BNSS §174) | Private complaint (BNSS §223) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offence type | Cognizable | Non-cognizable | Any (typical for non-cognizable + refusal) |
| Filed with | Officer-in-charge, any police station | Officer-in-charge, jurisdictional PS | Judicial / Metropolitan Magistrate |
| Police action without warrant | Allowed — arrest + investigation | Not allowed — needs magistrate order | n/a until magistrate orders §175(3) probe |
| Copy to informant | Free, mandatory | Free copy of entry | Yes — sealed complaint copy |
| Time bar | None for cognizable in BNS | Limitation under BNSS §467-§472 applies | Limitation under BNSS §467-§472 applies |
| Statute (BNSS 2023) | §173 | §174 | §223 |
| Statute (CrPC 1973, old) | §154 | §155 | §200 |
| Police-refusal remedy | §173(4) SP + §175(3) magistrate | n/a — go straight to magistrate | n/a — magistrate is the forum |
| Mandatory affidavit | Not required | Not required | Yes, where §175(3) probe sought (Priyanka Srivastava) |
| Investigation jurisdiction | Where offence occurred (Zero-FIR allowed) | Where offence occurred | Local magistrate's jurisdiction |
| Final outcome | Charge-sheet under §193 / closure report | Refer to magistrate | Cognizance under §227 + trial |
| Examples of cases routed | Snatching, rape, robbery, cheating, kidnap | Simple hurt, defamation, public nuisance | Cheque-bounce private complaint, defamation, refused FIR |
BNSS Schedule I is a long table listing every offence in the BNS 2024 + special laws, with columns for:
Reading the schedule is the cleanest way to know which door is yours. The schedule is published in the BNSS bare act + on indiacode.nic.in. Most legal commentaries (Universal, EBC, LexisNexis) reproduce it as an appendix.
Some examples (illustrative, verify against current BNSS Schedule I):
A Zero FIR is an FIR registered at any police station, irrespective of jurisdiction, with serial number “0” — and then transferred to the jurisdictional police station once the location of the offence is determined. The legal anchor:
When to invoke a Zero FIR:
Citizens are routinely confused because:
The mental anchor: FIR is what police register; complaint is what citizen gives, either to police or to magistrate; NCR is the specific kind of police record-entry for non-cognizable cases.
Lalita Kumari (2014) — preliminary inquiry is not permitted when the information discloses a cognizable offence except in the narrow categories the SC listed (matrimonial, corruption, medical negligence, commercial). Snatching, theft, rape, kidnap, robbery, cheating — these get FIR immediately.
A General Diary entry is not an FIR. The PS is obliged to convert a GD entry on a cognizable offence into a §173 BNSS FIR. The Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Punati Ramulu (1993) Supp. 1 SCC 590 held that a “rough” GD entry that contains the bones of a cognizable offence is treated as the FIR for legal purposes.
Many cheating / breach-of-trust / matrimonial cases have both criminal and civil aspects. Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar (1985) 2 SCC 370 — the criminal court has jurisdiction even if the civil court can also act. Police cannot dismiss a §318 (cheating) case just because a parallel civil suit could be filed.
The PS where you go must register the FIR if the offence is cognizable (BNSS §173(1) proviso — Zero FIR). The SP / DCP route under §173(4) is the remedy when the PS refuses; it is not the first step.
Jurisdiction is not a ground to refuse FIR — the Zero FIR provision exists exactly for that. Refer the officer to BNSS §173(1) proviso.
There is no fee, no stamp duty, no payment for FIR. Free copy under §173 BNSS. Demanding money is itself an offence under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 §7 + BNS §198 (public-servant violating law to cause injury).
An FIR is registered on the informant's statement alone. Witnesses are required at the investigation stage, not at registration.
There is no waiting period. “Forthwith” in §173 is operational. Lalita Kumari (2014) — registration must be without delay; investigation begins immediately after registration.
Tip — Always carry a written application stating the facts + offence sections you allege. Demand an acknowledgement copy of the application. Either you walk out with the FIR copy under §173 BNSS, or you walk out with the acknowledged application that records the time of presentation — which becomes evidence for your §175(3) BNSS magistrate-direction route.
Read the BNS 2024 sections (publicly available at indiacode.nic.in). Match the facts to a section number.
Cognizable or non-cognizable? Bailable or non-bailable?
If unsure or if the officer is delaying, hand over a written application addressed to the SHO + duplicate copy. Demand a stamped acknowledgement on the duplicate.
If the PS refuses to register a cognizable-offence FIR, send a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police (rural) or DCP (urban) under BNSS §173(4) by registered post with AD + email. SP/DCP must investigate the refusal and, if satisfied, direct the FIR's registration.
If the SP/DCP also refuses or delays, file an application under BNSS §175(3) before the Judicial Magistrate. Annex (a) the written application to the SHO with acknowledgement, (b) the §173(4) complaint with proof of dispatch, © supporting documents. Affidavit mandatory under Priyanka Srivastava (2015) 6 SCC 287. The magistrate may direct investigation or hold a §223 inquiry.
If gross misconduct or constitutional-rights violation is alleged, a §528 BNSS application to the High Court (inherent powers) or an Article 226 writ can compel FIR registration. Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP (2008) 2 SCC 409 — the magistrate route under §156(3) (now §175(3)) is the first resort; the High Court is invoked when the magistrate's process has also failed.
Jaipur 2024 — chain-snatching FIR delay
Use for: cognizable offence at the PS where SHO is delaying.
To,
The Station House Officer,
[POLICE STATION NAME]
[ADDRESS, CITY, PIN]
Date: [DD-MM-YYYY] Time of presentation: [HH:MM IST]
Sub: Application for registration of FIR under §173 BNSS 2023
for offences under BNS 2024 §[XXX], §[YYY]
Sir/Madam,
I, [FULL NAME], son/daughter/spouse of [FATHER/SPOUSE NAME], aged
[YY] years, resident of [FULL ADDRESS], Aadhaar masked
XXXX-XXXX-[last 4], PAN [XXXXX1234X], Mobile +91-XXXX-XXXXXX,
respectfully submit:
1. On [DD-MM-YYYY] at [TIME], at [LOCATION], the following
cognizable offence(s) was/were committed:
[DETAILED FACTS, WITNESSES, EVIDENCE, ESTIMATED LOSS]
2. The offence(s) is/are punishable under:
BNS 2024 §[XXX] — [DESCRIPTION], which per BNSS Schedule I
is //Cognizable + [Bailable/Non-bailable]//.
3. Under §173(1) BNSS 2023, your office is obliged to register
this FIR forthwith. Under the proviso to §173(1), jurisdiction
is not a ground for refusal — registration as Zero FIR is
mandatory if applicable.
4. The Supreme Court Constitution Bench in //Lalita Kumari v.
Government of UP// (2014) 2 SCC 1 has held that registration
of FIR is mandatory when information discloses a cognizable
offence; preliminary inquiry is impermissible in this category.
5. I respectfully request:
(a) registration of FIR under §173 BNSS forthwith;
(b) free copy of the FIR to me under §173(2);
(c) recording of statements of witnesses listed below.
Witnesses:
- [NAME 1], [ADDRESS], [MOBILE]
- [NAME 2], [ADDRESS], [MOBILE]
Evidence attached:
- [PHOTOS / CCTV STILLS / MEDICAL REPORT / DOCUMENTS]
- [DEVICE / SCREENSHOTS / BANK STATEMENTS]
Place: [CITY]
Date: [DD-MM-YYYY]
Yours faithfully,
[SIGNATURE]
[NAME]
Acknowledgement (to be filled by PS):
Received on: ___ / ___ / 20___ at ____ IST.
Diary No.: __________________
Officer's signature + name + rank: _________________________
PS seal: ___________
Cc: Superintendent of Police / Deputy Commissioner of Police, [DISTRICT]
— for noting under BNSS §173(4) if FIR is not registered within 24 hours.
Use for: non-cognizable offence, OR after exhausting §173(4) escalation.
IN THE COURT OF THE [JUDICIAL / METROPOLITAN] MAGISTRATE,
[FIRST CLASS / SECOND CLASS], AT [CITY / DISTRICT]
Complaint Case No. ____ of 20___
[NAME, ADDRESS, PAN, AADHAAR MASKED] ... Complainant
Versus
[NAME OF ACCUSED, KNOWN ADDRESS / 'KNOWN TO POLICE'] ... Accused
COMPLAINT UNDER §223 BNSS 2023 READ WITH §175(3) BNSS 2023
The complainant most respectfully submits:
1. [FULL FACTS, DATES, LOCATIONS, NAMES, AMOUNTS]
2. The acts of the accused constitute offences under BNS 2024
§[XXX] (description), which per BNSS Schedule I is
//Non-cognizable + Bailable// [or, where applicable,
//Cognizable but FIR was refused, see annexures//].
3. I have approached the Station House Officer, [PS NAME], by
written application dated [DD-MM-YYYY] (Annexure A) and
escalated to the Superintendent of Police / DCP, [DISTRICT],
by registered post AD No. [XXXXX] dated [DD-MM-YYYY]
(Annexure B); no FIR has been registered.
4. The complainant verifies the contents of this complaint on
oath. An affidavit under //Priyanka Srivastava v. State of UP//
(2015) 6 SCC 287 is filed herewith (Annexure C).
5. PRAYER:
(a) Direct the investigation of the case under §175(3)
BNSS 2023 by [NAMED PS or CRIME BRANCH], submitting
report under §193 BNSS within [SUGGESTED PERIOD]; OR
(b) Take cognizance under §227 BNSS, examine the
complainant on oath under §223, and issue process
to the accused.
List of witnesses (to be examined under §223):
1. [NAME 1, FULL ADDRESS]
2. [NAME 2, FULL ADDRESS]
List of documents (annexed):
- Annexure A: PS application + acknowledgement
- Annexure B: §173(4) escalation to SP/DCP + RPAD
- Annexure C: Affidavit verifying facts (notarised)
- Annexure D-G: [supporting evidence]
Place: [CITY]
Date: [DD-MM-YYYY]
For the Complainant,
[ADVOCATE NAME, BAR COUNCIL NO.]
[CONTACT]
Submit a written application to the SHO with a duplicate copy and demand stamped acknowledgement (with date and time). If the FIR is still not registered, send a §173(4) BNSS complaint to the Superintendent of Police (or DCP) by registered post with AD + email. If still not registered, file an application under §175(3) BNSS before the Judicial Magistrate, with an affidavit per Priyanka Srivastava (2015).
The BNSS §173(1) proviso codifies Zero FIR for any cognizable offence anywhere in India. It is most commonly invoked for sexual offences, road-accidents during travel, and inter-state cyber fraud. The receiving PS registers and transfers to the jurisdictional PS within a reasonable time.
Some states allow e-FIR for specific offences (vehicle theft, mobile loss, missing person) via state-police citizen portals. Maharashtra (Mahapolice), Delhi (DP citizen portal), Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Telangana have online e-FIR options. For serious / contact-sensitive offences (sexual offences, violence), physical PS or §173 BNSS assistance from any officer remains required.
Yes, the magistrate has discretion. The Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava (2015) requires the magistrate to apply mind. The magistrate may also choose to proceed under §223 (record the complainant's statement) instead of directing police investigation.
BNSS §467-§472 (replacing CrPC §467-§472) set the limitation. Generally:
Court may condone delay under §473 in the interest of justice.
Under BNSS §193(2), when police find insufficient evidence, they file a closure (Final) report. The magistrate may (a) accept, (b) reject and direct further investigation under §175(3), or © take cognizance on the basis of the case papers under §210(1)(b). The informant has a right to be heard under Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police (1985) 2 SCC 537.
No. The FIR is not substantive evidence; it is admissible only to corroborate the informant's testimony under §157 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (was IEA §157) or to contradict under §145. The substantive evidence is the witness's deposition in court. Hasib v. State of Bihar (1972) 4 SCC 773 is the foundational citation.
A cognizable-offence FIR cannot be unilaterally withdrawn by the informant. The Public Prosecutor may withdraw under §360 BNSS (was §321 CrPC) with court permission. Compoundable offences under §359 BNSS can be settled between parties with court permission for offences like simple hurt, defamation, cheating below threshold. Non-compoundable offences (rape, murder) cannot be settled.
“NC complaint” colloquially refers to a complaint of a Non-Cognizable offence, recorded as an NCR (Non-Cognizable Report) under BNSS §174. The police record the entry, give a copy, and refer the informant to the Judicial Magistrate for a private complaint under §223.
Yes. Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar (1985) 2 SCC 370. The criminal and civil routes operate in parallel; one does not preclude the other.
| Myth | Reality |
|---|---|
| “Police must conduct preliminary inquiry before FIR.” | Lalita Kumari (2014) — preliminary inquiry only in narrow categories, not the default. |
| “GD entry = FIR.” | GD entry without §173 registration is not an FIR; SHO obliged to register if cognizable. |
| “Without jurisdiction, the PS cannot register FIR.” | BNSS §173(1) proviso codifies Zero FIR — register anywhere in India. |
| “NCR is the same thing as FIR.” | NCR is for non-cognizable offences; no investigation without magistrate's order. |
| “Private complaint to magistrate requires my own lawyer.” | DLSA (Legal Services Authority) provides free advocates for the financially eligible. |
| “Police can ignore my §173(4) escalation.” | The DGP / SP / DCP is statutorily bound; non-action is judicially reviewable. |
The decision tree is short: read the BNS section number → check BNSS Schedule I → cognizable → FIR under §173, non-cognizable → NCR under §174, refusal → §173(4) SP escalation → §175(3) magistrate direction → §528 BNSS / Article 226 if all else fails. Carry a written application + stamped acknowledgement at every step. Use the §223 private-complaint route when the offence is non-cognizable or when the police path has collapsed. The system is built to work — Lalita Kumari (2014) made registration mandatory; Priyanka Srivastava (2015) regulated the magistrate route; the BNSS 2023 codified Zero FIR. Use these levers.
More comparisons: browse every RTI-vs-alternative side-by-side in RTI vs Alternatives: the full comparison hub <!– rti-wiki-comparisons-hub-2026-vs-start –>