Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), which governed FIR registration, has been replaced by Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The new provision significantly expands the FIR framework by introducing electronic communication as a valid mode of information, empowering preliminary inquiries for minor offences, mandating recording by woman officers in sensitive cases, and requiring mandatory acknowledgment receipts and videography. These changes codify the Zero FIR concept and modernise FIR registration for the digital age.
What changed
| Feature | Section 154 CrPC (Old) | Section 173 BNSS (New) |
|---|---|---|
| Mode of information | Oral or written only | Oral, written, or electronic communication |
| Zero FIR | No express provision (judicial practice) | Expressly codified — "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed" |
| Preliminary inquiry | Not permitted (Lalita Kumari) | Permitted for offences punishable with 3-7 years with superior officer permission |
| Woman officer recording | No specific requirement | Mandatory for information given by a woman or involving specified offences |
| Videography | No provision | Mandatory videography of recording process for mentally/physically disabled persons |
| Acknowledgment receipt | Not mandatory | Mandatory — physical or digital — for every complaint |
| Electronic FIR signing | Not contemplated | Information given by electronic means must be signed within 3 days |
| Penalty for non-registration | No specific penalty in this section | Rigorous imprisonment of 6 months to 2 years plus fine for refusal to register |
Full statutory text
Section 154 CrPC (Old Law) — Relevant Extract:
(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant.
(3) Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record the information referred to in sub-section (1) may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him.
Section 173 BNSS (New Law) — Relevant Extract:
(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station, and if given— (i) orally, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it; (ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf:
Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68, section 69, section 70, section 71, section 74, section 75, section 76, section 77, section 78, section 79 or section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is alleged to have been committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer.
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant or the victim.
(3) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in section 175, on receipt of information relating to the commission of any cognizable offence, which is made punishable for three years or more but less than seven years, the officer in charge of the police station may with the prior permission from an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, (i) proceed to conduct preliminary enquiry to ascertain whether there exists a prima facie case for proceeding in the matter within a period of fourteen days; or (ii) proceed with investigation when there exists a prima facie case.
(4) Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record the information referred to in sub-section (1), may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Sanhita, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence failing which such aggrieved person may make an application to the Magistrate.
Key differences
Electronic FIR registration: Section 173(1)(b) expressly permits FIR information to be given by "electronic communication." The informant must physically or digitally sign the information within three days. This eliminates the requirement of physical presence at the police station.
Zero FIR codified: The phrase "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed" in Section 173(1) gives statutory recognition to the Zero FIR concept. Any police station must register the FIR regardless of territorial jurisdiction, then forward it to the station having jurisdiction.
Preliminary inquiry for certain offences: Section 173 introduces a provision (not present in Section 154 CrPC) allowing a preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether a prima facie case exists for offences punishable with imprisonment of three to seven years. This requires prior permission of a superior officer. For offences punishable with seven years or more, or with death or life imprisonment, FIR registration remains mandatory without any preliminary inquiry — consistent with Lalita Kumari.
Woman officer mandate: When the informant is a woman, or the offence involves certain specified categories, the information must be recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer. This is a new safeguard not present in CrPC.
Mandatory videography: For cases involving mentally or physically disabled informants, the recording process must be videographed. This ensures transparency and creates an evidentiary record of the complaint process.
Mandatory acknowledgment receipt: The police must issue an acknowledgment receipt (physical or digital) for every complaint received, ensuring a documented trail and accountability.
Penal consequence for non-registration: A public servant who fails to record information under Section 173(1) relating to a cognizable offence faces rigorous imprisonment of not less than six months extendable to two years, plus fine.
What this means for practitioners
For complainants: Electronic FIR registration eliminates jurisdictional barriers and the need for physical presence. Complainants can now lodge e-FIRs and must receive acknowledgment receipts. The penal provision for non-registration gives teeth to the right to have an FIR registered.
For defence counsel: The introduction of preliminary inquiry for 3-7 year offences provides a window where FIR registration may be deferred. Defence lawyers should monitor whether the preliminary inquiry was conducted with proper superior officer permission and completed within a reasonable time.
For police compliance: Officers must establish infrastructure for receiving and processing electronic communications, issuing digital acknowledgments, and conducting videography for disabled informants. Every police station requires systems for e-FIR registration.
For pending cases: Under Section 531(2)(a) BNSS, FIRs registered before 1 July 2024 remain governed by Section 154 CrPC. All FIRs registered on or after 1 July 2024 must comply with Section 173 BNSS requirements.
Does old case law still apply?
Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2014) 2 SCC 1: The Constitution Bench ruling that FIR registration is mandatory when information discloses a cognizable offence remains fully applicable. Section 173 BNSS codifies this principle. However, for offences punishable with 3-7 years imprisonment, the new preliminary inquiry provision partially modifies the Lalita Kumari position by permitting a limited inquiry before registration. For offences punishable with seven years or more, the Lalita Kumari mandate of immediate registration remains unchanged.
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335: The guidelines regarding circumstances where FIR can be quashed continue to apply, as Section 173 BNSS does not alter the quashing framework.
T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala (2001) 6 SCC 181: The ruling that there can be only one FIR in relation to a cognizable offence remains applicable. A second complaint regarding the same facts would be treated as further information, not a fresh FIR.
All case law on the mandatory nature of FIR registration, the duty of police to record information, and the rights of informants continues to apply to Section 173 BNSS, subject to the new preliminary inquiry provision for 3-7 year offences.
Judicial interpretation under BNSS Section 173 (post-July 2024)
The following cases from the Veritect Legal Intelligence database show how courts are applying Section 173 BNSS in practice:
XXX v. State of Kerala (27 January 2026)
Court: Supreme Court of India | Bench: Dipankar Datta, Manmohan JJ. | Result: Appeal disposed of; Division Bench order upheld
In its first authoritative pronouncement on the interplay between Sections 173(4) and 175 BNSS, the Supreme Court held that Section 175(4) is neither a standalone provision nor a proviso to Section 175(3), but a "procedural adjunct" that must be read harmoniously with it. This means a complainant who approaches a Magistrate for FIR registration against a public servant must first exhaust the Section 173(4) remedy of approaching the Superintendent of Police and must support the complaint with an affidavit under Section 333 BNSS. The Court provided a detailed three-scenario guide for magistrates dealing with complaints against public servants under Section 175(4).
Veritect reference: Diary_8626-2025_Judgment
Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat (28 March 2025)
Court: Supreme Court of India | Bench: Abhay S. Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan JJ. | Result: FIR quashed
The Supreme Court quashed an FIR registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, holding that police must observe the discretion granted under Section 173(3) BNSS to avoid mechanically registering FIRs in cases involving expressive conduct and free speech under Article 19(1)(a). The judgment underscores that constitutional rights cannot be sidelined by procedural technicalities, and courts may intervene at the pre-investigation stage to prevent abuse of process.
Veritect reference: Diary_3511-2025_Judgment
Emerging patterns
- Section 173(4) hierarchy enforced: The Supreme Court has established that the statutory hierarchy — first approach SP, then Magistrate — must be followed before seeking Magistrate direction for FIR registration, especially against public servants.
- Preliminary inquiry discretion under Section 173(3): Courts expect police to exercise meaningful discretion under the preliminary inquiry provision rather than mechanically registering FIRs, particularly where free speech or civil disputes are involved.
- Affidavit requirement read into complaints: Even where the statute uses the word "complaint" (which includes oral complaints), courts are reading in a requirement for written complaints supported by affidavits when seeking Magistrate intervention for FIR registration.
Frequently asked questions
Can I file an FIR electronically under BNSS? Yes. Section 173(1)(b) expressly permits filing FIR information through electronic communication. However, the informant must sign the information within three days of submission, either physically or digitally.
Is Zero FIR now mandatory under BNSS? Yes. Section 173(1) uses the phrase "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed," making it mandatory for any police station to register the FIR regardless of jurisdiction. The FIR is then forwarded to the police station having territorial jurisdiction.
Can police conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR under BNSS? Only for offences punishable with imprisonment between 3 and 7 years, with prior permission of a superior officer. For offences punishable with 7 years or more, death, or life imprisonment, the FIR must be registered immediately without any preliminary inquiry.
What is the penalty for a police officer who refuses to register an FIR? Under BNSS, a public servant who fails to record information relating to a cognizable offence under Section 173(1) faces rigorous imprisonment of not less than six months extendable to two years, plus fine.