Police refused to register your FIR — three-step escalation
If a Station House Officer refuses to register an FIR for a cognizable offence, the law gives you three sequential escalations — the Superintendent of Police, the Magistrate, and the High Court. Each step is documentary, each step works.
You spent two hours at the police station. The SHO heard you out, asked a few questions, and then handed your written complaint back across the desk. He said the matter is too small, or the area is not his jurisdiction, or that he will look into it and let you know. No FIR was registered. No copy was given. You left empty-handed.
This is one of the oldest grievances in Indian policing, and the law has long had an answer to it. Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — the procedural code that replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 from 1 July 2024 — three statutory escalations are stacked one above the other. Each is a written remedy. Each can be invoked in sequence. By the time you reach the third, the State has had several formal chances to perform a duty it should have performed on day one.
The law in plain English
Where a cognizable offence is disclosed, the police have no discretion. Section 173 of the BNSS [Section 154 of the CrPC, 1973] requires the officer in charge of a police station to record every information of a cognizable offence — orally given information must be reduced to writing, read back to the informant, and signed. A free copy of the FIR must be supplied to the informant under Section 173(2) BNSS [Section 154(2) CrPC]. None of this is optional.
The Supreme Court settled the matter in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1: registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154(1) of the CrPC — now Section 173(1) of the BNSS — if the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. A preliminary inquiry is permissible only in a handful of categories such as matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, medical negligence, corruption cases and complaints filed after abnormal delay; even in those categories the inquiry is limited and must be wrapped up quickly. The police cannot decline to register an FIR on the ground that the area falls under another police station — they must record it and forward it. They cannot decline on the ground that the allegations look weak; assessment of strength is for the investigation, not for the desk officer. Mohindro v. State of Punjab AIR 2001 SC 2113 is the clearest authority on the SHO's duty to register the case first and then investigate, not the other way round.
If the SHO breaks this rule, the law sets up a ladder. Section 173(4) of the BNSS [Section 154(3) of the CrPC] gives any aggrieved person the right to send the substance of the information in writing — by post — to the Superintendent of Police. If the SP is satisfied that a cognizable offence is disclosed, the SP must either investigate the case personally or direct a subordinate officer to investigate. If the SP also fails to act, Section 175(3) of the BNSS [Section 156(3) of the CrPC] empowers the Magistrate to direct the police to register and investigate. The BNSS adds a new precondition here that did not exist under the old CrPC — the Magistrate can pass a Section 175(3) order only if the complainant first approached the SP under Section 173(4) and the SP failed to act. Skipping the SP rung is no longer cosmetic; it is jurisdictional.
Step-by-step procedure
Treat the entire process as a paper trail. Every escalation requires you to attach proof of the earlier rung. Each step builds on the documents from the step before.
Step 1 — Get the refusal in writing, or get a refusal noted. Before you walk away from the police station, ask the SHO to record his refusal in the Daily Diary (Roznamcha). Even if he refuses to record a formal refusal, write your own one-page note recording: the date, the time, the police station, the SHO's name, what you reported, and what was said. Get any officer at the station to put a station seal or initial on a copy. If no one will sign anything, a contemporaneous note dated and timed on the spot is still useful evidence later.
Step 2 — Send a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police under BNSS Section 173(4) [Section 154(3) CrPC]. Within a few days of the refusal — not weeks — prepare a written complaint addressed to the Superintendent of Police of the district. Set out, in plain factual terms: who you are; the cognizable offence; what happened, where and when; the police station and SHO who refused; the date of the refusal; and your request that the SP either investigate the matter or direct the SHO to register an FIR. Attach a draft of the FIR text you want registered. Send the complaint by Speed Post or Registered Post AD with proof of delivery, or hand-deliver it and get a Diary Number with the SP's seal on your copy. Both modes are valid; both create the record you will need at the next rung. Keep originals of postal receipts.
Step 3 — Wait, but not too long. Section 173(4) does not specify a time limit, but the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari placed the inquiry duration at 7 days in routine cases and not more than 15 days in complex ones. Two weeks is a reasonable wait. If you receive no response, or the SP merely forwards the matter back to the same SHO with no change in outcome, you have exhausted the SP rung.
Step 4 — File an application before the jurisdictional Magistrate under BNSS Section 175(3) [Section 156(3) CrPC]. The application is filed in the court of the Judicial Magistrate having territorial jurisdiction over the place where the offence occurred. It is a short written application that sets out the offence, names the accused if known, narrates the SHO's refusal, narrates the SP's failure to act, and prays for a direction to the police to register the FIR and investigate. Annex: the original written complaint to the SHO (or your dated note), the written complaint to the SP, postal receipts and acknowledgement, and any reply received from the SP. Pay the prescribed court fee — it is small, fixed by State rules. The Magistrate will hear you, examine the documents, and pass a reasoned order. If satisfied, the order will direct the SHO to register an FIR and investigate.
Step 5 — Decide whether to take the parallel route under Section 223 BNSS [Section 200 CrPC]. Instead of asking the Magistrate to direct the police, you can ask the Magistrate to take cognizance directly on your private complaint under Section 210 BNSS [Section 190 CrPC]. The Magistrate then examines the complainant and the witnesses on oath under Section 223 BNSS [Section 200 CrPC], and either proceeds to issue process under Section 227 BNSS [Section 204 CrPC] or directs an inquiry under Section 225 BNSS [Section 202 CrPC]. This route bypasses police investigation entirely — the Magistrate becomes the gatekeeper. The Supreme Court in All India Institute of Medical Sciences Employees' Union v. Union of India confirmed that this private-complaint route is open whenever the police fail to register an FIR for a cognizable offence. Choose only one path — Section 175(3) or Section 223 — at the outset. Filing both at the same time creates procedural confusion that no court appreciates.
Step 6 — If the Magistrate also refuses to direct registration, move the High Court. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police to register an FIR, is the constitutional remedy of last resort. The petition annexes everything from Steps 1 to 4 and prays for a direction to the State police authorities. The Article 32 route to the Supreme Court is available but is reserved for exceptional cases — High Courts handle these matters far more frequently.
What to watch for
The escalation ladder works only if each rung is documented. Five traps trip up most complainants.
Skipping the SP rung is now jurisdictional under BNSS Section 175(3). The most consequential change in the new code is that the Magistrate's Section 175(3) power is unlocked only after a Section 173(4) application to the SP has been made and gone unanswered. Under the old Section 156(3) CrPC, going straight from the SHO to the Magistrate was common; under the BNSS, it is fatal. The Magistrate will dismiss your application for want of the precondition. Send the SP letter even if you have no faith in the SP — it is the price of admission to the Magistrate's court.
Delay weakens every rung. The longer you wait between the offence and the FIR, the more leverage the police have to argue that the complaint is mala fide or an afterthought. Move within days, not months. If genuine reasons delayed you — illness, threats, advice — record them in the complaint itself so the explanation is on the record.
The Magistrate cannot direct a preliminary inquiry before registration. If the Magistrate at the Section 175(3) stage records that the police should first do a "preliminary inquiry" and then decide whether to register, that order is bad in law. Udaybhanu v. State of U.P., 1993 CrLJ 274 (All) struck down such an order. The Magistrate's job is binary — either direct registration or refuse the application — not order an investigation-before-investigation.
Electronic evidence requires proper preservation. WhatsApp messages, screenshots, CCTV footage and emails that prove the offence must be preserved in a form admissible under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 [Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872]. Keep the original device unaltered. A bare screenshot stripped from a phone is weaker than a printout with the Section 63 BSA certificate from the person in charge of the device. Mention electronic evidence in your SHO and SP complaints — the police are required to consider it.
Filing parallel applications confuses the court. Pick a path and stay on it. If you have filed a Section 175(3) application, do not also file a private complaint under Section 223 BNSS in the same court at the same time. If you switch paths, withdraw the earlier one cleanly and start the new one with a fresh prayer.
Some cognizable offences trigger a criminal liability on the refusing officer. Section 198 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [Section 166A of the IPC, 1860] makes it an offence for a public servant to disobey the direction of law, particularly in cases of certain sexual offences and offences against women. If your case falls in that category and the SHO refused, mention this section in your SP complaint. It changes the SP's calculation about how to respond.
If things go wrong
The ladder above is the ordinary procedural route. Three further remedies exist for cases where the police have not just refused but have actively obstructed.
Constitutional writ. A petition under Article 226 to the High Court is available the moment the State has failed in its duty. The writ of mandamus directs the police to perform the statutory duty under Section 173 BNSS. The High Court can also pass interim orders restraining the accused from leaving the jurisdiction, directing CCTV preservation, or appointing a specific officer to investigate. Article 32 lies to the Supreme Court, but is used sparingly.
National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commission. Where the refusal involves abuse, custodial misconduct, refusal to register a case of a death in police interaction, or refusal on grounds of caste, religion or gender, a complaint to the NHRC under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 is open. The NHRC complaint can be filed online at nhrc.nic.in or by post. The Commission has the power to summon records, examine officers, and recommend disciplinary action and compensation.
Departmental and criminal action against the officer. A separate complaint to the District Police Commissioner, the Director General of Police, or the State Police Complaints Authority initiates a departmental inquiry. Where the offence is one specified in Section 198 of the BNS [Section 166A of the IPC], a private complaint can be filed against the refusing officer himself before the Magistrate. The threat of personal criminal liability changes police behaviour faster than most other tools.
Resources
Helplines and portals.
- Emergency: 112
- Women in distress: 1091
- Child helpline: 1098
- Cyber crime: 1930 (call) or cybercrime.gov.in (online)
- National Human Rights Commission: nhrc.nic.in
State police portals. Every State Police website carries the contact details of the Superintendent of Police of each district, the District Police Commissioner where applicable, and an online grievance portal. Delhi: delhipolice.gov.in. Maharashtra: mahapolice.gov.in. Uttar Pradesh: uppolice.gov.in. Tamil Nadu: tnpolice.gov.in. Karnataka: ksp.karnataka.gov.in. The format is uniform across States.
Statutory references. BNSS Section 173 (registration of FIR), Section 173(4) (escalation to SP), Section 175(3) (direction by Magistrate), Section 210 (cognizance by Magistrate), Section 223 (examination of complainant), Section 528 (inherent powers of the High Court). Equivalent CrPC sections: 154, 154(3), 156(3), 190, 200, 482. BNS Section 198 [IPC Section 166A] — refusal by public servant to register specified offences.
Sample templates. Two PDFs are linked at the foot of this guide — a written complaint to the SHO that doubles as the draft FIR attached to the SP letter, and an application to the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS with the proper recital that the SP rung has been exhausted. Both have placeholders for the specific facts of your case.
Court fee. The court fee on a Section 175(3) BNSS application is fixed by State rules and is uniformly small — typically between Rupees 5 and Rupees 50. The court fee on a private complaint under Section 223 BNSS is similar. Cost is not the barrier; documentation is.
Outcome
If the SHO refuses to register an FIR for a cognizable offence, the law gives you three sequential escalations — the SP under Section 173(4) BNSS, the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS, and the High Court under Article 226. Lalita Kumari has settled that registration is mandatory; Mohindro has settled that registration must precede investigation; and the BNSS itself requires that the SP rung be tried before the Magistrate's. Each step is documentary; each step is binding on the State. The escalation is slow at the SHO level and fast at the Magistrate level — most matters that reach a Magistrate's Section 175(3) order get an FIR registered within a fortnight.