Understanding the Comprehensive Scope of FIR in Criminal Investigations

Every criminal investigation in India begins with a single document – the First Information Report, or FIR. It is the trigger that sets the entire machinery of criminal law into motion. Yet, despite being one of the most frequently discussed legal instruments, its actual scope, procedural requirements, and limitations are often misunderstood – even by those studying law. With India’s new criminal procedure law, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), having replaced the old Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) from July 1, 2024, understanding the FIR’s ambit and scope has become even more relevant.

What is an FIR and where does it stand in law? 🔗

Interestingly, the term “First Information Report” is not formally defined anywhere in Indian criminal law – not in the Indian Penal Code, the old CrPC, or the new BNSS. As per police regulations and judicial interpretation, it refers to information given to an officer in charge of a police station about the commission of a cognizable offence – a crime serious enough for the police to arrest without a court-issued warrant. Under the new law, this procedure is governed by Section 173 of the BNSS, 2023 (previously Section 154 of the CrPC).

The term “First Information Report” itself finds specific reference in the BNSS only in Section 210(2), even though the entire procedure for its registration is detailed under Section 173. This distinction is important – the FIR is a procedural device, not a substantive legal term with a statutory definition.

Scope of an FIR: who can file it and for what offences? 🔗

The scope of an FIR is wider than many assume. Anyone with information about a cognizable offence can file an FIR – it does not have to be the victim or an eyewitness. A neighbour, a bystander, or even a police officer who comes to know of an offence can set the process in motion. Courts have even recognised anonymous letters as valid FIRs in appropriate circumstances. The key requirement is that the information must relate to a cognizable offence.

For non-cognizable offences, the police cannot register an FIR directly. In such cases, the complainant must approach a Magistrate, who may then direct the police to investigate. An FIR under Section 155 of the CrPC (now its BNSS equivalent) is filed for non-cognizable offences, but only after a Magistrate’s order – the police have no independent authority to act.

Procedural requirements under Section 173 of the BNSS 🔗

Section 173 lays down a clear step-by-step procedure for receiving and recording information about cognizable offences. Each step carries legal significance.

Mode of giving information 🔗

Information can be given orally or through electronic communication – a significant update from the old CrPC, which did not explicitly recognise electronic modes. If given orally, the officer must reduce it to writing and read it back to the informant. If given electronically (such as by email), the informant must sign the report within three days for it to be officially recorded. An unsigned e-FIR is deleted from the system.

Mandatory contents of an FIR 🔗

While there is no rigid format mandated, an FIR must contain enough information to disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. Typically, this includes the date, time, and place of the incident; a description of the offence; names or descriptions of persons involved; and the relevant sections of law under which the offence falls. The more precise and detailed the information, the stronger the investigative foundation it provides.

Special protections for vulnerable informants 🔗

Section 173 of the BNSS introduces specific protections for certain categories of informants. If a woman victim files an FIR for offences such as rape or stalking, her statement must be recorded by a woman police officer. If the victim is physically or mentally disabled, the statement must be taken at their residence or a location suitable for them, in the presence of an interpreter or special educator if necessary.

Free copy to the informant 🔗

Once the FIR is registered, the police are legally required to provide a copy to the informant free of cost. This is not a courtesy – it is a statutory right. The copy serves as an important record for the complainant in case of any subsequent disputes about what was reported.

Zero FIR and e-FIR: expanding the ambit 🔗

One of the most significant expansions of the FIR’s scope under the BNSS is the codification of Zero FIR. Previously a practice developed through judicial intervention (particularly after the 2012 Nirbhaya case and the Justice Verma Committee recommendations), the Zero FIR is now formally embedded in Section 173(1) of the BNSS. The provision explicitly states that information can be given “irrespective of the area where the offence is committed.” This means any police station in India must register an FIR for a cognizable offence, even if the crime occurred in a completely different jurisdiction. The FIR is then transferred to the appropriate police station for investigation.

Similarly, e-FIR – the electronic filing of an FIR – has been formally recognised under the BNSS, making the process more accessible for citizens who cannot physically reach a police station. E-FIR registration applies only to cognizable offences punishable for more than three years; non-cognizable offences are excluded from this channel.

Preliminary enquiry: when an FIR can be delayed 🔗

The BNSS introduces a nuanced provision regarding preliminary enquiries. For cognizable offences punishable between three and seven years, the officer-in-charge may, with prior permission from an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), conduct a preliminary enquiry before registering the FIR. This enquiry must be completed within 14 days. The purpose is to prevent the registration of FIRs in cases where the information may be false, vague, or insufficient to disclose a cognizable offence.

However, the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) remains foundational here: if the information received clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, registration of an FIR is mandatory. No preliminary enquiry is permissible in such cases. The officer cannot exercise discretion to “wait and watch” when the cognizable nature of the offence is evident from the information itself.

What must happen after the FIR is registered? 🔗

Registration of an FIR is not the end of the process – it is the beginning of a chain of legally mandated actions.

Mandatory investigation 🔗

Once an FIR is registered for a cognizable offence, the police are legally bound to investigate. The police must collect evidence, record statements of witnesses, and may arrest accused persons as per law. The investigation must, in most cases, conclude within 60 to 90 days under the BNSS, with charge sheets for heinous crimes required to be filed within three months.

Outcome of investigation 🔗

After completing the investigation, the police file one of several possible reports before the court. If sufficient evidence exists, a charge sheet is filed. If no evidence is found, a Final Report is submitted. If no offence is established, a cancellation report is filed. If the accused cannot be traced, an “untraced” report is filed. The Magistrate then considers the report and decides on further proceedings.

Upload on public portal 🔗

Following the Supreme Court’s directions in Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India (2014), FIRs are required to be uploaded on the police or state website, ensuring transparency and enabling the accused to access a copy even before the charge sheet is filed.

What happens when police refuse to register an FIR? 🔗

Refusal to register an FIR is a common grievance. The law provides a clear escalation pathway. Under Section 173(3) of the BNSS, an aggrieved person can send the complaint to the Superintendent of Police, who must act if a cognizable offence is disclosed. If that too fails, the person may approach the Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, who can direct the police to register an FIR and investigate. The High Court also remains available through writ jurisdiction if the lower remedies fail. Importantly, the Supreme Court in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki clarified that the remedies under Section 173(3) and 173(4) must be exhausted before approaching the Magistrate directly.

The evidentiary value and limitations of an FIR 🔗

An FIR is not substantive evidence in a trial – it cannot, by itself, prove the guilt of the accused. FIRs and police statements are generally inadmissible as substantive evidence, but serve crucial functions in corroboration and contradiction of witness testimony during trial. There is, however, one significant exception: if the informant dies and the FIR contains a statement about the circumstances of their death, it may be treated as a dying declaration and admitted as substantive evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Another key limitation is that an FIR is not a charge sheet. It records only the initial information and does not determine guilt. Courts have repeatedly cautioned against treating an FIR as a conclusive document. Its value lies in being the first contemporaneous record of the crime, helping to check subsequent embellishments or modifications in the prosecution’s case.

FIR vs. complaint: a critical distinction 🔗

The two terms are often used interchangeably in ordinary conversation, but they are legally distinct. A complaint is an allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate with a view to their taking action under the law. An FIR is a report made to the police officer in charge of a police station. The FIR enables police to take necessary measures to investigate a crime, whereas a complaint before the Magistrate initiates a different procedural pathway – one that is typically used for non-cognizable offences or when the police have refused to act.

What do you think? Given that the BNSS now codifies Zero FIR and electronic filing, do you think these reforms are sufficient to ensure that no cognizable offence goes unregistered in India? And if an FIR is not substantive evidence of guilt, how much weight should courts give to delays in its filing when evaluating the credibility of a case?

References

1. https://www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/BNSSEnglish_0.pdf
2. https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-news-analysis/first-information-report-fir
3. https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/current-affairs/section-173-of-bnss
4. https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/to-the-point/bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-&-code-of-criminal-procedure/first-information-report-fir
5. https://www.legalprobe.in/2025/08/section-173-bnss-explained-your-rights.html
6. https://lawfoyer.in/e-fir-zero-fir-under-bnss-provisions-procedure-and-cases/
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Nagarik_Suraksha_Sanhita
8. https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/41942.pdf
9. https://www.clearias.com/first-information-report-fir/
10. https://www.legalbites.in/bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita/evidentiary-value-of-fir-statements-made-to-police-and-magistrates-under-bnss-2023-1158941
11. https://www.indialawoffices.com/legal-articles/first-information-report-fir