CrPC 155 vs BNSS 174: Non-Cognizable Cases Changes Explained (2026)

In India, Section 174 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced Section 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) on 1 July 2024. The police still record a non-cognizable report and refer the informant to the Magistrate; the new duty is to forward the daily diary report of all such cases fortnightly to the Magistrate.

At a glance

CrPC	BNSS	Rule	Key words	Change
155(1)	174(1)	Information about a non-cognizable offence is entered in a book and the informant is referred to the Magistrate	"in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe"; new clause (ii): daily diary report "fortnightly to the Magistrate"	Expanded
155(2)	174(2)	No investigation of a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try it or commit it for trial	"No police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate"	Identical
155(3)	174(3)	An officer receiving the order has cognizable-case investigation powers, except arrest without warrant	"(except the power to arrest without warrant)"	Identical
155(4)	174(4)	A case with at least one cognizable offence is deemed a cognizable case	"notwithstanding that the other offences are non-cognizable"	Identical

Section 174 is a procedural provision, so it has no punishment or classification of its own. Whether an offence is non-cognizable comes from the First Schedule to the BNSS (for BNS offences) or from the law creating the offence. Section 2(1)(o) BNSS defines a non-cognizable offence as one for which "a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant", the same words as Section 2(l) CrPC.

What changed

Minor edit — Section 174(1), form of the book: "in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf" becomes "in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf". The book must now follow a form set by State rules.
Expanded — Section 174(1)(ii), fortnightly daily diary report: Section 155(1) ended "and refer the informant to the Magistrate". Section 174(1) ends "and,— (i) refer the informant to the Magistrate; (ii) forward the daily diary report of all such cases fortnightly to the Magistrate." The second duty is new.
Identical — heading: "Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases" is carried over word for word.
Identical — Section 174(2): the bar on investigation without a Magistrate's order.
Identical — Section 174(3): the powers of the officer who receives the order, with the arrest exception.
Identical — Section 174(4): the rule that a case including at least one cognizable offence is deemed cognizable.
Neighbouring change — Section 176(2) BNSS: a similar fortnightly duty now appears for cognizable cases where the officer does not investigate under the first proviso to Section 176(1) — the officer must "forward the daily diary report fortnightly to the Magistrate". That is outside Section 174 and covers only cognizable cases falling under clause (a) or (b) of that proviso; Section 157(2) CrPC had no daily diary duty.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 155(1) CrPC (repealed from 1 July 2024):

(1) When information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf, and refer the informant to the Magistrate.

Extract, Section 174(1) and (2) BNSS:

(1) When information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf, and,— (i) refer the informant to the Magistrate; (ii) forward the daily diary report of all such cases fortnightly to the Magistrate.

(2) No police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.

How it works — the steps

Information reaches the police station (s.174(1)). The duty applies to information given to "an officer in charge of a police station" about a non-cognizable offence committed "within the limits of such station".
Entry in the book (s.174(1)). The officer enters, or causes to be entered, the "substance of the information" in a book kept in the form set by State rules. In practice this entry is called a non-cognizable report (NCR); the BNSS itself does not use that term.
Referral to the Magistrate (s.174(1)(i)). The informant is referred to the Magistrate. The informant may then file a complaint. A Magistrate taking cognizance on it under Section 210 BNSS (Section 190 CrPC) examines the complainant under Section 223 BNSS (the counterpart of Section 200 CrPC), and under the first proviso to Section 223(1) must first give the accused an opportunity of being heard.
Fortnightly report to the Magistrate (s.174(1)(ii)). Separately, the officer forwards "the daily diary report of all such cases" to the Magistrate every fortnight.
Investigation only on the Magistrate's order (s.174(2)). The order must come from a Magistrate "having power to try such case or commit the case for trial".
Powers after the order (s.174(3)). The officer investigating under the order has the same powers as an officer in charge of a police station in a cognizable case, but not the power to arrest without warrant.
Mixed cases (s.174(4)). Where a case "relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable", the whole case is deemed cognizable, so no order under s.174(2) is needed to investigate the non-cognizable parts.
The police report (s.2(1)(h) Explanation). A report made by a police officer "in a case which discloses, after investigation, the commission of a non-cognizable offence" is deemed a complaint, and the officer is deemed the complainant. The Explanation to Section 2(d) CrPC used the same words.

Worked example. A neighbour reports that X obstructed a municipal officer at work. Obstructing a public servant under Section 221 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) is listed in the BNSS First Schedule as non-cognizable and bailable, triable by any Magistrate. The station records the substance in the book, refers the neighbour to the Magistrate, and includes the case in the next fortnightly daily diary report. If the facts also disclosed a cognizable offence, Section 174(4) would make the whole case cognizable. Note that a prosecution under Section 221 BNS also needs the written complaint of the public servant under Section 215(1)(a) BNSS — see the Umashankar Yadav judgment below.

What this means in practice

For the informant: the NCR entry does not start an investigation. The two routes are a complaint to the Magistrate, or an application asking the Magistrate to order investigation under Section 174(2). Ask for the NCR details so that the complaint can refer to them. In Krishna Lal Chawla v. State of U.P. ([2021] 2 S.C.R. 550 (2021 INSC 160), 8 March 2021) the Supreme Court said that if the complainant, who had lodged an NCR, "was aggrieved by lack of speedy investigation", the appropriate remedy "would have been to apply to the Magistrate under Section 155(2), CrPC for directions to the police" (para 7); it said so while quashing a private complaint he filed six years after giving information to the police.
For the officer in charge: record the substance in the prescribed book, refer the informant, and include the case in the fortnightly daily diary report under Section 174(1)(ii). Do not investigate without the Magistrate's order unless the case also involves a cognizable offence (s.174(4)).
For the investigating officer acting on an order: the order confers cognizable-case powers except arrest without warrant (s.174(3)). If arrest becomes necessary, a warrant is needed.
For the accused: if the police registered and investigated a purely non-cognizable offence without a Magistrate's order, Keshav Lal Thakur (below) supports an application to quash under the High Court's inherent powers (Section 528 BNSS, formerly Section 482 CrPC). Check also whether the offence is one of those in Section 215 BNSS that can be prosecuted only on a written complaint of a public servant or a court.
For advocates: whether the fortnightly report under Section 174(1)(ii) prompts any action by the Magistrate is not stated in the section. Any argument that the report itself triggers a duty to act is a reading, not text.

Judgments that still matter

The operative words of Section 174(2) to (4) BNSS repeat Section 155(2) to (4) CrPC, so, on a reading of the text, judgments construing those words remain relevant. No Supreme Court judgment construing Section 174 BNSS itself was found in our search (see Sources).

Keshav Lal Thakur v. State of Bihar (Supreme Court, 11 October 1996; M.K. Mukherjee and S.P. Kurdukar JJ.). The police registered a case under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which the police themselves treated as non-cognizable, investigated it, and filed a final report; the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on that report. The Court held that the police "could not have registered a case for such an offence under Section 154" and could investigate a non-cognizable offence only on a Magistrate's order under Section 155(2), which had not been made, so neither the investigation nor the report could support cognizance. The Court added that the deemed-complaint Explanation to Section 2(d) CrPC relates to a case where the police begin investigating a cognizable offence and ultimately find only a non-cognizable one. The appeal was allowed and the proceedings quashed. The order has no paragraph numbers.

State of Orissa v. Sharat Chandra Sahu and Anr., [1996] Supp. 7 S.C.R. 304 (8 October 1996; Kuldip Singh and S. Saghir Ahmad JJ.). A wife's complaint of bigamy (Section 494 IPC, non-cognizable) and cruelty (Section 498A IPC, cognizable) reached the police through the Women's Commission; the police charge-sheeted both. The High Court quashed the Section 494 charge. The Supreme Court held that Section 155(4) creates a legal fiction under which a case with cognizable and non-cognizable offences is treated as cognizable, so the police "had no option but to investigate the whole of the case" (para 11), and were acting within their authority in investigating both (para 12). The State's appeal was allowed and the High Court's order was set aside so far as it quashed the Section 494 charge, with a direction to the Magistrate to proceed (para 15). Section 174(4) BNSS repeats the words construed.

Umashankar Yadav & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [2025] 5 S.C.R. 1306 (2025 INSC 653) (8 May 2025; P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi JJ.). This judgment applies the CrPC. The FIR alleged obstruction of a public servant (Section 186 IPC, non-cognizable) and assault (Section 353 IPC). The Court held that, in the absence of the ingredients of Section 353, the Magistrate's prior permission under Section 155(2) "was necessary to register FIR", and its absence made the registration and investigation "bad in law" (para 31). It also held that cognizance of Section 186 on a police report breached Section 195 CrPC (para 32), and that the Explanation to Section 2(d) does not cure this because the fiction makes the police officer — not the aggrieved public servant — the complainant (para 34). The prosecution was quashed and the appeal allowed (para 36).

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that an appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is to be disposed of, continued, held or made in accordance with the CrPC "as if this Sanhita had not come into force". On a reading of that provision, an investigation ordered under Section 155(2) and pending before that date continues under the CrPC, and information given on or after 1 July 2024 falls under Section 174 BNSS. See offence before 1 July 2024 — which law applies.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNSS equivalent of Section 155 CrPC?

Section 174 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replaced Section 155 CrPC from 1 July 2024. The heading and sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) are word for word the same. Sub-section (1) adds a duty to forward the daily diary report of all non-cognizable cases fortnightly to the Magistrate.

What does the police do when I report a non-cognizable offence?

Under Section 174(1) BNSS the officer in charge of the police station must enter the substance of the information in a book kept in the form the State Government prescribes by rules, and refer you to the Magistrate. The officer must also forward the daily diary report of all such cases fortnightly to the Magistrate under Section 174(1)(ii). The police cannot investigate on their own.

Can the police investigate a non-cognizable offence?

Only with an order. Section 174(2) BNSS says no police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try the case or commit it for trial. In Keshav Lal Thakur v. State of Bihar (1996) the Supreme Court quashed proceedings where the police had registered and investigated a non-cognizable offence without such an order under Section 155(2) CrPC.

Can the police arrest without a warrant after the Magistrate orders investigation?

No. Section 174(3) BNSS gives the officer who receives the Magistrate's order the same investigative powers as in a cognizable case, except the power to arrest without warrant. The same exception appeared in Section 155(3) CrPC.

What happens if a complaint discloses both cognizable and non-cognizable offences?

Section 174(4) BNSS deems the whole case to be cognizable, notwithstanding that the other offences are non-cognizable. In State of Orissa v. Sharat Chandra Sahu (1996) the Supreme Court held under the identical Section 155(4) CrPC that the police can then investigate all the offences and file a charge-sheet covering both kinds.

Is a police report in a non-cognizable case treated as a complaint?

Yes, under the Explanation to Section 2(1)(h) BNSS, which repeats the Explanation to Section 2(d) CrPC: a report disclosing, after investigation, a non-cognizable offence is deemed a complaint and the police officer is deemed the complainant. In Umashankar Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025) the Supreme Court held that this deeming does not satisfy Section 195 CrPC, which requires the complaint of the public servant concerned.

What is the new fortnightly daily diary report under Section 174 BNSS?

Section 174(1)(ii) BNSS requires the officer in charge to forward the daily diary report of all non-cognizable cases fortnightly to the Magistrate. Section 155 CrPC had no such duty. The BNSS does not state what the Magistrate must do on receiving the report.

Sources

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette of India text): Sections 2(1)(g), (h) and Explanation, (o), (t); 2(2); 173(4); 174; 176(2); 531(2)(a); First Schedule rows for BNS Sections 209 and 221.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (India Code original text): Sections 2(c), (d) and Explanation, (l); 155.
Keshav Lal Thakur v. State of Bihar, Supreme Court, 11 October 1996 — corpus file S_1996_7_578_579_EN.md.
State of Orissa v. Sharat Chandra Sahu and Anr., [1996] Supp. 7 S.C.R. 304 — corpus file S_1996_7_304_309_EN.md.
Umashankar Yadav & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [2025] 5 S.C.R. 1306 (2025 INSC 653) — corpus file 2025_5_1306_1315_EN.md.
Krishna Lal Chawla & Ors. v. State of U.P., [2021] 2 S.C.R. 550 (2021 INSC 160) — corpus file 2021_2_550_569_EN.md (para 7, on the Section 155(2) remedy).

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.

Section 155 CrPC vs Section 174 BNSS — Information as to Non-Cognizable Cases and Investigation of Such Cases