Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh & Others
Bench: Constitution Bench — 5 Judges (P. Sathasivam CJ, B.S. Chauhan, Ranjan Gogoi, M.Y. Eqbal & S.K. Singh JJ)
Parties
Facts of the Case
A child named Lalita Kumari had gone missing. Her father Bhola Kamat went to the local police station to lodge an FIR (First Information Report) — the police refused to register the FIR despite the report of a cognisable offence (kidnapping). Bhola Kamat approached the Supreme Court through a writ petition. This petition — combined with several similar complaints of police refusal to register FIRs across India — led to a Constitution Bench reference on the mandatory nature of FIR registration under Section 154 CrPC.
Legal Issues Before the Court
- 1Is registration of an FIR under Section 154 CrPC mandatory upon receipt of information disclosing a cognisable offence — or does the police officer have discretion to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering the FIR?
- 2Can police refuse to register an FIR even when the complaint clearly discloses a cognisable offence?
- 3In what limited categories of cases can a preliminary inquiry be conducted before FIR registration?
The Judgment
The Constitution Bench held that registration of an FIR under Section 154 CrPC (Section 173 BNSS) is mandatory upon receipt of information disclosing a cognisable offence. Police officers do not have discretion to refuse to register an FIR where the complaint discloses a cognisable offence on its face. However, the Court identified limited categories where a preliminary inquiry (not exceeding 7 days) may be conducted before registration: (1) matrimonial disputes; (2) commercial offences; (3) medical negligence; (4) corruption cases; (5) cases where there is abnormal delay in reporting. Even in these categories, if the inquiry reveals a cognisable offence, an FIR must be registered.
Key Principles Laid Down
MANDATORY FIR REGISTRATION — NO POLICE DISCRETION TO REFUSE: When information received at a police station discloses a cognisable offence on its face, registration of the FIR under Section 154 CrPC (Section 173 BNSS) is mandatory. Police cannot refuse to register, cannot conduct extended inquiries before registration, and cannot demand proof or evidence before registering.
SECTION 154 CrPC IS DIRECTORY NOT DISCRETIONARY: The word 'shall' in Section 154 CrPC is mandatory — a police officer receiving information about a cognisable offence shall register the FIR. There is no room for police discretion to decline registration.
FIVE LIMITED CATEGORIES FOR PRELIMINARY INQUIRY: In five limited categories (matrimonial offences, commercial offences, medical negligence, corruption cases, and cases with abnormal delay), police may conduct a brief preliminary inquiry (not more than 7 days) before registration — to verify whether the allegation discloses a cognisable offence. This inquiry is not an investigation and cannot delay registration if the cognisable offence is apparent.
CONSEQUENCES OF NON-REGISTRATION: A police officer who refuses to register an FIR for a cognisable offence is liable to departmental action and can be subjected to contempt proceedings. The aggrieved person can also approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC (Section 173(3) BNSS) or the Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC.
FIR REGISTRATION ≠ CONVICTION: Registering an FIR does not prejudge guilt — it only initiates the investigation process. The Court emphasised that mandatory FIR registration serves the constitutional interest of victims who deserve a fair investigation.
BNSS SECTION 173 — SAME MANDATORY PRINCIPLE: The BNSS 2023's Section 173 retains the mandatory FIR registration principle from Section 154 CrPC. The Lalita Kumari ruling applies with equal force to BNSS Section 173.
Impact on Indian Law
Lalita Kumari (2014) transformed police accountability for FIR registration across India. The judgment settled a long-standing debate about whether police had discretion to decline FIR registration — conclusively holding they do not. It has been used in thousands of High Court orders directing police to register FIRs and in contempt actions against police officers who refuse. The BNSS 2023's Section 173 codifies the mandatory registration principle. The judgment is particularly significant for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and marginalized communities who had historically faced police refusal to register FIRs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is FIR registration mandatory under Section 154 CrPC / BNSS 173?
Yes. Lalita Kumari (2014) held that FIR registration is mandatory when information received at a police station discloses a cognisable offence on its face. Police cannot refuse to register an FIR for a cognisable offence. In five limited categories (matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, medical negligence, corruption, and cases with abnormal delay), a brief preliminary inquiry of up to 7 days is permissible — but even then, if the cognisable offence is apparent, registration must follow.
What can a person do if police refuse to register their FIR?
If police refuse to register an FIR for a cognisable offence, the person can: (1) complain to the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC (Section 173(3) BNSS) — the SP is empowered to investigate or direct registration; (2) approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC (Section 175 BNSS) who can direct police to investigate; (3) file a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 citing Lalita Kumari; (4) file a contempt petition if there is a prior court direction to register.