Where the police refuse to register your FIR, the remedy is not to keep returning to the station — it is to move the Magistrate. A complaint under Section 173 of the BNSS can be filed directly before the Magistrate, who can then direct an investigation under Section 175(3). Under Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, registration of an FIR is mandatory where the information discloses a cognisable offence. A writ petition to the High Court remains available where the refusal is part of a wider failure to act.
Scope and jurisdiction at a glance
- Who can complain
- Any person may make a complaint to a Magistrate. Standing is not confined to the victim, though the Magistrate will consider the complainant's connection to the matter when deciding how to proceed.
- Which court
- The complaint is made to the Magistrate having jurisdiction over the place where the offence was committed, under the ordinary rules of territorial jurisdiction for criminal proceedings.
- The two distinct routes
- A Magistrate approached after a police refusal can take one of two paths, and which you ask for matters:
- A direction to the police to register and investigate, under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, which puts the machinery of investigation to work.
- Taking cognizance on the complaint itself under Section 210 of the BNSS, examining the complainant on oath and proceeding as a complaint case without police investigation.
- What must be shown first
- Under Section 175(3) of the BNSS the applicant must show that they first approached the officer in charge of the police station and then the Superintendent of Police, and that neither acted. An application filed without exhausting that step is liable to be returned.
- What to file with it
- The written complaints already made to the police station and to the Superintendent, with proof of dispatch and any acknowledgement, a supporting affidavit, and the underlying documents. The Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015) required an affidavit in support of such applications.
- The writ alternative
- A writ petition under Article 226 lies where the failure to act is part of a wider abdication of duty, but it is not a substitute for the Magistrate route where that route is available and has not been tried.
- Time limit
- The period of limitation for taking cognizance depends on the punishment prescribed for the offence, and delay should be explained. Serious offences punishable with more than three years carry no limitation bar.
Being told that the police will not register your FIR is one of the more frustrating experiences in the Indian legal system. It happens for a range of reasons — some legitimate (the matter may not disclose a cognisable offence), many not (political pressure, personal relationships between the accused and police, or simply unwillingness to take on a complicated matter). Whatever the reason, the refusal to register an FIR is not the end of the road. There are specific legal routes that allow a complainant to approach a court directly and compel the matter to be investigated.
The Section 173 BNSS complaint to a Magistrate
Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (previously Section 190 CrPC), a Magistrate can take cognisance of an offence on a complaint made by any person. This is a direct route — bypassing the police entirely. The complainant files a written complaint before the competent Magistrate (the Judicial Magistrate First Class or Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi), the Magistrate examines the complainant and any witnesses on oath, and if satisfied that the allegations disclose an offence, can take cognisance and proceed.
Under Section 175 BNSS (previously Section 156(3) CrPC), a Magistrate who takes cognisance on a complaint can also direct the police to investigate the matter and file a report. This is a powerful remedy — a Magistrate-directed investigation is harder for the police to sideline than a voluntary investigation, because non-compliance is itself a contempt.
The Section 175(3) BNSS direction: making the police investigate
Where the Magistrate is satisfied that the complaint discloses a cognisable offence and it is appropriate for the police to investigate, a direction under Section 175(3) BNSS requires the Station House Officer to register the FIR and investigate. The Supreme Court and High Courts have repeatedly held that where a cognisable offence is made out on the face of the complaint, the Magistrate must direct the police to register and investigate — there is no discretion to decline in a clear case.
Obtaining such a direction requires a well-drafted complaint that clearly sets out: the facts disclosing the offence, the provision of law under which it falls, the identity of the accused where known, and the evidence or material available to support the allegations. A complaint that is vague or omits essential elements gives the Magistrate reason to decline to take cognisance.
The Lalita Kumari direction: when the FIR is mandatory
The Supreme Court's decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh established that registration of an FIR is mandatory where the information received by the police discloses a cognisable offence. The police have no discretion to refuse in such cases — they may conduct a preliminary enquiry only in limited categories of cases (matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, medical negligence, and corruption), and that enquiry must be completed within 15 days. Outside those categories, registration is immediate and mandatory.
Filing a complaint before the Magistrate citing this obligation — and asking the Magistrate to direct the SHO to comply — is particularly effective where the police have given a clear refusal and the offence is unambiguously cognisable.
Writ petition to the High Court
Where the Magistrate route is not producing results, or where the refusal to register an FIR has a political or institutional dimension, a writ petition to the Delhi High Court under Article 226 directing registration of the FIR is available. The High Court has exercised this jurisdiction in numerous cases and has the power to direct both the SHO and the Commissioner of Police to take specific action. This route is more appropriate where lower-level intervention has failed, or where the circumstances require the kind of scrutiny and accountability that only High Court oversight can provide.
Where police authorities decline to register an FIR, Vikram Singh Kushwaha has worked on complaint records, supervisory representations, and court complaints before the competent magistrate.
The strength of such a case usually lies in a clean chronology, precise allegations, and documents that show why judicial intervention is necessary.
Trying to get an FIR registered, or the police are refusing? The FIR & Police-Complaint Self-Help Pack gives you the ready-to-edit letters, replies and checklist for exactly this situation — drafted by Advocate Kushwaha and delivered instantly.
Get the FIR & Police-Complaint pack — ₹499Police have refused to register your FIR despite a clear cognisable offence?
Share a brief account of the facts, the offence disclosed, and the police's response for an assessment of the most effective route to compel investigation.
Consultation & feesIf the SHO and DCP routes have failed, a criminal complaints lawyer in Delhi can move the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS with a complete record.