Court invokes Section 528 BNSS to ensure justice amidst discrepancies in FIR registration related to cognizable offences.
The Allahabad High Court has issued a significant directive concerning discrepancies in the registration of First Information Reports (FIRs) related to cognizable offences. The judgment, delivered by Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari on March 17, 2026, highlights the statutory obligations of police authorities to register FIRs based on information disclosing a cognizable offence under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
In the case of Shivam Singh v. State of U.P., the applicant sought to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order related to allegations under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The FIR, filed at Police Station C.B. Ganj, Bareilly, was contested by the applicant on the grounds that it did not disclose any offence under the aforementioned sections. The applicant argued that there was no solemnization of marriage between him and the opposite party, making the allegations vague and baseless.
Conversely, the State's counsel contended that the FIR and the victim's statement indicated a false promise of marriage, leading to extramarital relations. The victim alleged that the applicant had made false promises regarding marriage and a government job, which led to sexual relations based on deceit.
Justice Tiwari's observations pointed out discrepancies between the written complaint and the FIR, suggesting negligence in the police investigation. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of Section 154 CrPC, which obliges police officers to register an FIR based solely on information disclosing a cognizable offence, without discretion regarding the reliability or credibility of the information.
The court invoked Section 528 BNSS, using its inherent powers to address the discrepancies and ensure justice. Directions were issued to the Director General of Police (DGP) and the Principal Secretary Home of Uttar Pradesh to educate police authorities about the legal mandates and submit an affidavit detailing compliance measures. Additionally, the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Bareilly was instructed to take prompt action against the concerned police authorities and clarify why the FIR was registered under sections not disclosed by the complaint.
Justice Tiwari referenced previous Supreme Court judgments reinforcing the mandatory nature of Section 154, including Ramesh Kumari v. State (NCT of Delhi) and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, which assert the duty of police officers to register FIRs without delving into the genuineness or credibility of the information.
The case has been scheduled for further hearings in the week commencing April 27, 2026, with the authorities expected to provide compliance reports. This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring procedural fairness and the proper administration of justice, particularly in criminal investigations.
Bottom Line:
Police authorities are statutorily bound to register an FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C. based on information disclosing a cognizable offence. Discrepancies between the written report and the FIR can affect the fairness and correctness of police investigation. Judicial intervention may be necessary under Section 528 BNSS to secure the ends of justice.
Statutory provision(s): Section 154 CrPC, Section 528 BNSS, Sections 498-A, 506 IPC
Shivam Singh v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2872756
