Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

FIR Registration Mandatory for Cognizable Offences -  preliminary inquiry not permissible:  Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India reiterated the mandatory nature of First Information Report (FIR) registration under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for cognizable offences. The bench, comprising Hon’ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, set aside a previous High Court order dismissing a writ petition seeking the registration of an offence.

The case involved the appellant, Sindhu Janak Nagargoje, who had filed a writ petition in the High Court seeking directions to register an offence related to the severe assault and subsequent death of her brother. The appellant’s plea was dismissed by the High Court. However, the Supreme Court, citing the landmark case of “Lalita Kumari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.” (2014) 2 SCC 1, emphasized the importance of registering FIRs for cognizable offences without any preliminary inquiry.

The bench held that, The registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.” The court further highlighted that the scope of preliminary inquiry is to ascertain whether the information reveals a cognizable offence or not and not to verify its veracity.

The judgment underlines the need for time-bound preliminary inquiries, not exceeding 7 days, and emphasizes that all information related to cognizable offences must be meticulously reflected in the police station’s records. The court also directed that erring officers failing to register FIRs for cognizable offences should face appropriate action.

This ruling reaffirms the significance of safeguarding personal liberty through prompt FIR registration for cognizable offences. The Supreme Court, allowing the appeal, directed that the concerned authorities proceed with the complaints filed by the appellant in accordance with the law.

Legal experts have hailed this decision as a milestone in ensuring swift action and accountability in cases involving cognizable offences. The judgment reinforces the principle that the registration of FIRs must be carried out promptly, based on the nature of the offence, without unnecessary delays or preliminary inquiries.

The Supreme Court’s ruling sets a precedent in upholding the rights of victims and complainants and ensuring a just and efficient legal process in cases of cognizable offences.

Date of Decision: AUGUST 08, 2023 

SINDHU JANAK NAGARGOJE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Latest Legal News