Section 154 CrPC vs Section 173 BNSS — First Information Report (FIR)

Section mapping CrPC ↔ BNSS expanded investigation procedure FIR registrationSection 154 CrPCSection 173 BNSSe-FIR
Old provision
Section 154 CrPC
Information in cognizable cases
New provision
Section 173 BNSS
Information in cognizable cases

Section 173 BNSS keeps the Section 154 CrPC duty to record information of a cognizable offence and adds five things: information may be given "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed"; it may be given by electronic communication, taken on record once signed within three days; the free copy goes to "the informant or the victim"; a new sub-section (3) lets the officer, with a Deputy Superintendent's prior permission, hold a preliminary enquiry within fourteen days for offences punishable with three years or more but less than seven years; and the refusal remedy now ends with an application to the Magistrate. The woman-officer and disabled-informant provisos, including videography, were already in Section 154 CrPC (Act 13 of 2013) and are re-enacted with BNS section numbers.

Veritect
Veritect Legal Intelligence
Legal Intelligence Agent
16 min read

In India, Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) on 1 July 2024. The FIR duty is unchanged; the BNSS adds electronic information, any-station recording, a free copy to the victim and a 14-day preliminary enquiry for three-to-under-seven-year offences.

At a glance

Old law New law
Section Section 154, CrPC 1973 Section 173, BNSS 2023 (in force from 1 July 2024, S.O. 848(E))
What it does Duty to record information of a cognizable offence Same duty, plus electronic information, any-station recording and a preliminary-enquiry window
Punishment None in s.154. Failure to record is punishable under s.166A(c) IPC: rigorous imprisonment of not less than six months, up to two years, and fine (listed offences only) None in s.173. Failure to record is punishable under s.199(c) BNS: rigorous imprisonment of not less than six months, up to two years, and fine (listed offences only)
Cognizable / bailable / triable by s.154 is procedural. IPC s.166A: cognizable, bailable, Magistrate of the first class (CrPC First Schedule) s.173 is procedural. BNS s.199: cognizable, bailable, Magistrate of the first class (BNSS First Schedule)
Change type — Expanded

What changed

  • Opening words of sub-section (1) — New. "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed" is added. Section 154(1) CrPC had no area words.
  • Mode of giving information — Expanded. "if given orally to an officer in charge" becomes "may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge".
  • Electronic information — New. Clause (ii): information by electronic communication "shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it".
  • Oral information — Identical in substance; register — Minor edit. Clause (i) keeps the writing, read-over and signature duties; "may prescribe" becomes "may by rules prescribe".
  • First proviso (woman informant) — Modified. The IPC list (ss.326A, 326B, 354, 354A–354D, 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B–376D, 376DA, 376DB, 376E, 509) becomes BNS ss.64–71, 74–79 and 124. The rule itself, recording "by a woman police officer or any woman officer", is unchanged and dates from Act 13 of 2013.
  • Second proviso (disabled person) — Modified. The IPC list, which did not include ss.326A or 326B, becomes the same BNS list, which does include s.124 (acid). "video graphed" becomes "videographed" (minor edit). The follow-up statement moves from "a Judicial Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (5A) of section 164" to "a Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (6) of section 183".
  • Sub-section (2), free copy — Expanded. "to the informant" becomes "to the informant or the victim".
  • Sub-section (3), preliminary enquiry — New. No counterpart in Section 154.
  • Refusal remedy, now sub-section (4) — Expanded. "in the manner provided by this Code" becomes "this Sanhita", and the sub-section adds "failing which such aggrieved person may make an application to the Magistrate".
  • Magistrate's route, Section 175(3) — Modified (linked provision). Section 156(3) CrPC said only that a Magistrate "may order such an investigation". Section 175(3) BNSS requires an application "supported by an affidavit made under sub-section (4) of section 173", inquiry as needed, and the police officer's submission.
  • Penalty for non-recording — Modified (outside the section). Section 166A(c) IPC becomes Section 199(c) BNS. The punishment is the same. The offence list changes to BNS ss.64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 74, 76, 77, 79, 124, 143 and 144.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Section 154(1) and (2) CrPC — 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; … (2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant.

Section 173(1)–(3) BNSS — 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— … (ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it, …

(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.

Section 173(4) BNSS — closing words:

… 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.

How it works — the steps

  1. Information reaches a police station (s.173(1)). It may be given at any station, "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed", orally or by electronic communication (defined in s.2(1)(i)).
  2. The officer records it (s.173(1)(i)–(ii)). Oral information is reduced to writing, read over and signed by the informant. Electronic information is taken on record once the sender signs it within three days. The substance is entered in the book the State Government prescribes by rules.
  3. Woman informant (first proviso). If a woman against whom an offence under BNS ss.64–71, 74–79 or 124 is alleged gives the information, it "shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer".
  4. Disabled person (second proviso). If that person is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, the information is recorded at their residence or chosen place, with an interpreter or special educator; the recording "shall be videographed"; and a Magistrate records their statement under s.183(6)(a) "as soon as possible".
  5. Free copy (s.173(2)). A copy goes forthwith, free, to the informant or the victim. Under s.2(1)(y) "victim" includes the guardian or legal heir.
  6. Preliminary-enquiry band (s.173(3)). For a cognizable offence punishable with three years or more but less than seven years, the officer may, with prior permission from a Deputy Superintendent of Police or above and considering the nature and gravity of the offence, either enquire within fourteen days whether a prima facie case exists, or proceed with investigation where one exists.
  7. Refusal (s.173(4)). The aggrieved person posts the substance of the information to the Superintendent of Police, who investigates or directs investigation if a cognizable offence is disclosed; failing that, the person may apply to the Magistrate under s.175(3), with an affidavit.

Worked example (the Supreme Court's illustration, Imran Pratapgadhi, para 25). Information says A hit X with a stick. Simple hurt under BNS s.115(2) is non-cognizable, so no FIR can be registered on it; grievous hurt under s.117(2) is cognizable, so the FIR must be registered unless s.173(3) applies.

What this means in practice

  • For an informant or victim: Any police station will do. Sign electronic information within three days, or clause (ii) does not let it be taken on record. Ask for the free copy (s.173(2)). If the station refuses, write to the Superintendent of Police by post (s.173(4)) and keep proof of posting; only then apply to the Magistrate, with an affidavit sworn as s.333 BNSS requires (s.175(3); XXX v. State of Kerala, paras 31.1, 41).
  • For a person named in the information: Where the alleged offence falls in the three-to-under-seven-year band, check whether the officer sought permission for a preliminary enquiry. For offences based on spoken or written words in that band, Imran Pratapgadhi (paras 29, 42(v)) holds that it is "always appropriate" to hold one and that the superior officer "must normally grant permission".
  • For the investigating officer: Record the permission from the Deputy Superintendent or above, and finish the enquiry within fourteen days. Under Imran Pratapgadhi (para 24), register the FIR at once if a prima facie case exists; if not, inform the informant so that s.173(4) can be used.
  • For the advocate: The s.199(c) BNS penalty covers only its own list, which omits ss.69, 75 and 78 of the s.173 proviso list and adds ss.143 and 144.

Judgments that still matter

Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P., [2013] 14 S.C.R. 713 (2013 INSC 748), 12 November 2013. A Bench of five Judges (P. Sathasivam CJI, B.S. Chauhan, Ranjana Prakash Desai, Ranjan Gogoi and S.A. Bobde JJ.), judgment delivered by the Chief Justice, answered the reference in para 111. Registration of an 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" (para 111(i)). A preliminary inquiry is allowed only where the information does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the need for inquiry, and only to see whether one is disclosed (paras 111(ii), (v)); para 111(vi) lists illustrative categories such as matrimonial, commercial, medical-negligence and corruption cases. Why it matters now: in Imran Pratapgadhi (para 22) the Supreme Court held that s.173(1) BNSS is substantially the same as s.154(1), so Lalita Kumari remains relevant, subject to the exception in s.173(3). Note: the S.C.R. report gives the inquiry time limit in direction (vii) as "7 days", while Imran Pratapgadhi quotes it (as para 120.7) as "fifteen days generally"; the texts read do not explain the difference, so neither figure is relied on here.

T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 942 (2001 INSC 294), 12 July 2001. In a judgment delivered by Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri J. (with S.N. Phukan J.), the Court held that the information first entered in the station house diary is the FIR under s.154. Later information is a statement under s.162, and "No such information/statement can properly be treated as an F.I.R. and entered in the Station House Diary again, as it would in effect be a second FIR". Further material is to be reported under s.173(8) CrPC. The second FIR in that case, registered three years after the incident, was held invalid. Why it matters now: this is a reading of the text, not a holding on the BNSS. Section 173(1) repeats the recording duty, and the BNSS keeps a statements provision (s.181) and a further-report provision (s.193(9)), so the reasoning applies on its terms.

Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat, [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1309 (2025 INSC 410), 28 March 2025. In a judgment by Abhay S. Oka J. (with Ujjal Bhuyan J.), the Court construed s.173 BNSS directly. It held that s.173(3) "makes a significant departure from Section 154 of the CrPC" and is "an exception to sub-Section (1)". In that band the officer may enquire whether a prima facie case exists "even if the information received discloses commission of any cognizable offence" (paras 23, 42(i)). Reading the words complained of to see whether a cognizable offence is disclosed is not a prohibited inquiry (paras 26–27). The FIR had been registered under BNS ss.196, 197(1), 302, 299, 57 and 3(5) (para 3); the Court held that s.57 was on its face not applicable (para 28) and that the information did not attract ss.196, 197, 299 and 302 (para 31), and quashed the FIR (para 44).

XXX v. State of Kerala, 2026 INSC 88, 27 January 2026. In a judgment by Dipankar Datta J. (with Manmohan J.), the Court held that a person aggrieved by the police's failure to register an FIR "at the first instance, is required to approach the Superintendent of Police under sub-section (4) of Section 173". It held this is "a mandatory precondition" to approaching the Magistrate under s.175(3) (para 31.1). A complaint against a public servant under s.175(4) must be in writing and supported by an affidavit meeting s.333 BNSS (paras 39, 41, 44). The Division Bench's order was upheld (para 58). Why it matters now: it sets the order of the remedies after a refusal under s.173.

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that an investigation pending immediately before the BNSS came into force (1 July 2024) is continued "in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 … as if this Sanhita had not come into force". On a reading of that clause, information recorded under s.154 CrPC before that date, and the investigation that followed, stay under the CrPC. On the same reading, information first given on or after 1 July 2024 is recorded under s.173 BNSS even for an older incident, because no investigation was pending when the BNSS came into force. The Act that defines the offence is a separate question: see which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

Can I give information about a cognizable offence by email or another electronic channel under the BNSS? Yes. Section 173(1) BNSS says information of a cognizable offence may be given orally or by electronic communication, which Section 2(1)(i) defines broadly to cover written, verbal, pictorial or video content sent by a telephone, mobile phone, computer or other electronic device. Under clause (ii) the officer takes it on record only once it is signed within three days by the person giving it. Section 154 CrPC dealt only with information given orally or in writing.

Can I report a cognizable offence at a police station outside the area where it happened? Section 173(1) BNSS opens with the words "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed", so the recording duty applies at any police station. Section 173 itself does not say what happens to the information afterwards, for example whether it is transferred to the station with territorial jurisdiction. Section 154 CrPC had no area words.

Can the police hold a preliminary enquiry instead of registering an FIR? Only in the band Section 173(3) BNSS covers: cognizable offences punishable with three years or more but less than seven years. There the officer in charge may, with prior permission from an officer not below Deputy Superintendent of Police, hold a preliminary enquiry within fourteen days to see whether a prima facie case exists. In Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat (2025 INSC 410, paras 23-24) the Supreme Court held this is an exception to Section 173(1) and that, after the enquiry, the officer should either register the FIR at once or inform the informant.

What can I do if the police refuse to record my information? Section 173(4) BNSS lets you send the substance of the information in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police, and adds that, failing action, you may apply to the Magistrate. Section 175(3) requires that Magistrate's application to be supported by an affidavit made under Section 173(4). In XXX v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 88, para 31.1) the Supreme Court held that approaching the Superintendent first is a mandatory precondition.

Is it an offence for a police officer to refuse to record an FIR? Section 173 BNSS contains no penalty. Section 199(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 punishes a public servant who fails to record information given under Section 173(1) about a cognizable offence under BNS sections 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 74, 76, 77, 79, 124, 143 or 144, with rigorous imprisonment of six months to two years and fine. The BNSS First Schedule lists it as cognizable, bailable and triable by a Magistrate of the first class.

Who is entitled to a free copy of the FIR under Section 173 BNSS? Section 173(2) BNSS requires a copy of the information as recorded to be given forthwith, free of cost, "to the informant or the victim". Section 2(1)(y) defines victim to include the guardian or legal heir of the person who suffered the loss or injury. Section 154(2) CrPC named only the informant.

Were the woman-officer and videography requirements introduced by the BNSS? No. Both provisos to Section 154(1) CrPC were inserted by Act 13 of 2013 (w.e.f. 3-2-2013): information from a woman about a listed offence is recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer, and information from a disabled person is recorded at a place of their choice, with an interpreter or special educator, and videographed. Section 173(1) BNSS re-enacts both with BNS section numbers, adding BNS section 124 (acid) to the disabled-person proviso.

Sources

  • Acts and sections read: BNSS 2023 ss.2(1)(i), 2(1)(y), 173, 175, 531 (Gazette CG-DL-E-25122023-250884) and the BNSS First Schedule entry for BNS s.199; BNS 2023 s.199 (Gazette CG-DL-E-25122023-250883); CrPC 1973 ss.154 and 156 and the First Schedule entry for IPC s.166A (original India Code text); IPC 1860 s.166A (original India Code text).
  • Judgments read (Veritect judgment corpus, full text): Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2013_14_713_802_EN.md); T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala (2001_3_942_968_EN.md); Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat (2025_3_1309_1349_EN.md); XXX v. State of Kerala (Diary_8626-2025_Judgment.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.

Landmark cases referenced

  • • Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P., [2013] 14 S.C.R. 713 (2013 INSC 748)
  • • T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 942 (2001 INSC 294)

Post-2024 rulings under the new code

  • Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat, [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1309 (2025 INSC 410)
    Supreme Court of India · 2025-03-28
    Held that Section 173(3) BNSS is an exception to Section 173(1) and a significant departure from Section 154 CrPC: in the three-to-under-seven-year band a preliminary enquiry may test whether a prima facie case exists even where the information discloses a cognizable offence (paras 23, 42(i)); after the enquiry the officer registers the FIR or informs the informant so that Section 173(4) can be used (para 24). FIR quashed (para 44).
  • XXX v. State of Kerala, 2026 INSC 88
    Supreme Court of India · 2026-01-27
    Held that approaching the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS is a mandatory precondition to invoking the Magistrate under Section 175(3) (para 31.1), and that a complaint against a public servant under Section 175(4) must be in writing and supported by an affidavit (paras 39, 44). Division Bench order upheld; appeal disposed of (paras 58, 60).

Related sections

In the old code
  • • Section 155 CrPC — Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases
  • • Section 156 CrPC — Police officer's power to investigate cognizable case
  • • Section 164 CrPC — Recording of confessions and statements
  • • Section 166A IPC — Public servant disobeying direction under law
In the new code
  • • Section 174 BNSS — Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases
  • • Section 175 BNSS — Police officer's power to investigate cognizable case
  • • Section 183 BNSS — Recording of confessions and statements
  • • Section 199 BNS — Public servant disobeying direction under law
Statutory text verified against BNSS and BNS enacted text from the Gazette of India (CG-DL-E-25122023-250884 and -250883, pdftotext); CrPC 1973 and IPC 1860 from the original India Code PDFs (pdftotext); BNSS First Schedule table cross-checked against the Gazette schedule; all provisions re-read 2026-09-26
About Veritect

AI research & drafting, purpose-built for Indian litigation.

Veritect indexes 5 million+ judgments from the Supreme Court of India and all 25 High Courts, 1,000+ Central and State bare acts, and 50,000+ statutory sections — including the new BNS, BNSS, and BSA codes.

Built for Indian courts. Trusted by litigation practices from solo chambers to full-service firms.

Try Veritect free