Type to filter the sections on this page · press Enter to search the whole site.
No section on this page matches — press Enter to search the whole site instead.
Process at a Glance
How the Complaint Process Moves
1
Prior Approach to Police (Essential)
→
2
Draft Petition with Supporting Affidavit
→
3
Magistrate's Examination and Order
→
4
Police Investigation and FIR Registration
→
5
If Petition is Rejected — Revision
→
6
Draft the Complaint
→
7
Filing and Registration
→
8
Examination of Complainant on Oath — S.224 BNSS
→
9
Magistrate Takes Cognisance or Directs Inquiry
→
10
Appearance of Accused and Trial
Overview
Complaints Before a Magistrate — When Police Refuse to Act
When police refuse to register an FIR for a cognisable offence, a complainant has two remedies before a Magistrate. The first is a petition under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — which replaces Section 156(3) of the CrPC, 1973, for all cases from 1 July 2024. This petition asks the Magistrate to direct the police to investigate the offence under Section 175(1) BNSS — the Magistrate does not himself take cognisance but orders the police to register and investigate. The second remedy is a private complaint under Section 223 BNSS (formerly Section 200 CrPC) — where the Magistrate directly examines the complainant on oath, may take cognisance of the offence, and issue process (summons or warrant) to the accused.
For all cases arising from offences committed before 1 July 2024, the old provisions — Section 156(3) CrPC and Section 200 CrPC — continue to apply under the savings clause of BNSS Section 531. Delhi courts are currently handling both CrPC (old pending matters) and BNSS (new matters) streams simultaneously. In Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 1, a Constitution Bench of the SC held that registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC for cognisable offences — police cannot conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering the FIR. This judgment strengthened the 156(3) remedy significantly.
In Priyanka Srivastava v. State of UP, (2015) 6 SCC 287, the SC held that a complainant filing a 156(3) petition must file a supporting affidavit disclosing prior approach to the police and being turned away. Filing a 156(3) petition without any prior approach to police, without explanation, may result in rejection and action for perjury if the affidavit is false.
If police refuse to register your FIR when you report a crime, you have the right to approach a Magistrate's court directly. There are two ways to do this: (1) File a petition asking the Magistrate to order the police to register the FIR and investigate — this is the Section 156(3) CrPC / Section 175(3) BNSS route. (2) File a direct complaint before the Magistrate, who will hear you, record your statement, and may summon the accused directly — this is the Section 200 CrPC / Section 223 BNSS route. In Delhi, these complaints are filed in Metropolitan Magistrate Courts at Rohini, Karkardooma, Tis Hazari, Saket, and Dwarka depending on where the offence occurred.
Types of Complaints — When to Use Which Route
S.175(3) BNSS / S.156(3) CrPC — Direct Police to Investigate
Filed when police refuse FIR for a cognisable offence. Magistrate passes an order directing police to investigate under S.175(1) BNSS. Police then register FIR and investigate. Magistrate does not take cognisance himself. Direct route to police investigation. Affidavit of prior police approach required (Priyanka Srivastava, 2015).
S.223 BNSS / S.200 CrPC — Private Complaint Before Magistrate
Complainant files directly before Magistrate. Magistrate examines complainant on oath under S.224 BNSS / S.200 CrPC. May examine witnesses under S.225 BNSS / S.202 CrPC. If satisfied, takes cognisance and issues summons / warrant under S.226 BNSS / S.204 CrPC. If not satisfied, may dismiss under S.203 CrPC / S.227 BNSS.
Complaint to Superior Police Officer — S.173 BNSS / S.154(3) CrPC
Before approaching a Magistrate, the complainant may send the substance of the FIR information by post to the Superintendent of Police under S.173(4) BNSS / S.154(3) CrPC. If the SP is satisfied that a cognisable offence is disclosed, he may direct investigation. This is a pre-Magistrate step that courts look for before 156(3) / 175(3) filings.
Complaint under Special Acts — PWDV, POCSO, SC/ST Act
For offences under special statutes — Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, POCSO Act 2012, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 — separate complaint mechanisms exist before Magistrates. These statutes have their own provisions for complaints, police duties, and Magistrate powers that override or supplement the general BNSS / CrPC scheme.
Non-Cognisable Offences — S.144 BNSS / S.155 CrPC
For non-cognisable offences, police cannot investigate without Magistrate's order. The information is recorded in the NCR (Non-Cognisable Report) register and referred to the Magistrate. The Magistrate then decides whether to order investigation under S.155(2) CrPC / S.144(2) BNSS. Complaints for NC offences must follow this distinct route.
Revision / Appeal Against Dismissal
If the Magistrate dismisses a complaint under S.203 CrPC / S.227 BNSS, the complainant may file a revision petition before the Sessions Court under S.397 CrPC / S.442 BNSS, or a revision / quashing petition before the Delhi High Court under Section 482 CrPC / S.528 BNSS. There is no direct appeal against dismissal — revision is the remedy.
Key Takeaways
- When the police refuse to register an FIR for a cognizable offence, an aggrieved person can move the Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC (now Section 175(3) BNSS) to direct a police investigation, or file a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC (now Section 223 BNSS) for the Magistrate to take cognizance directly.
- A Section 156(3) / 175(3) application must be supported by an affidavit and is maintainable only after the complainant has first approached the SHO and then the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC / 173(4) BNSS (Priyanka Srivastava, 2015).
- The Magistrate must apply a judicial mind and not act as a “mere post office” — directing police investigation only where State machinery is genuinely needed; for simple cases the Magistrate should proceed on the complaint itself (Om Prakash Ambadkar, 2025).
- Under the complaint route (Section 200 / 223), the Magistrate examines the complainant and witnesses on oath, may hold an inquiry under Section 202 / 225 before issuing process, and then issues summons or warrant if a prima facie case is made out.
- For a cognizable offence the police are bound to register an FIR (Lalita Kumari, 2014); a Zero FIR can be lodged at any police station regardless of jurisdiction and later transferred to the competent one.
- From 1 July 2024 the BNSS replaced the CrPC — 156(3)→175(3), 200→223, 154→173, 190→210 — so transitional matters should carry dual CrPC / BNSS citations; the substantive scheme is largely carried forward with added safeguards.
Two Routes
S.175(3) BNSS vs S.223 BNSS — Key Differences
The choice between the two routes depends on the nature of the offence, the available evidence, and the desired outcome. Both routes can be pursued simultaneously or sequentially — there is no bar against filing a 223 BNSS complaint after a 175(3) BNSS petition has been filed.
Who Takes Cognisance
Under S.175(3) BNSS: the Magistrate does NOT take cognisance — the Magistrate merely directs police to investigate. Under S.223 BNSS: the Magistrate HIMSELF takes cognisance of the offence, examines the complainant, and issues process to the accused. This is a fundamental distinction affecting how the trial proceeds.
Stage of Police Involvement
Under S.175(3): police are directed to register FIR and investigate — they become the primary investigating agency. Under S.223: there is no mandatory police investigation at the outset. The Magistrate may direct investigation by police under S.225 BNSS / S.202 CrPC at his discretion before issuing process — but this is not automatic.
Prior Affidavit Requirement
Under S.175(3): mandatory affidavit of prior police approach required per Priyanka Srivastava (2015). Under S.223: no such mandatory affidavit requirement — the complainant files the complaint directly. However, the Magistrate may still ask about prior police approach when deciding whether to take cognisance.
Examination on Oath
Under S.175(3): the Magistrate passes an administrative order directing police — complainant is not examined on oath at this stage. Under S.223 BNSS / S.200 CrPC: the Magistrate MUST examine the complainant on oath (and any witnesses brought) before deciding to take cognisance. The examination statement is recorded and becomes part of the case record.
Suitable Offences
S.175(3) BNSS: suitable for cognisable offences where police investigation is needed — physical evidence, witnesses, forensic examination, etc. S.223 BNSS: suitable for offences where the complainant has sufficient documentary evidence to satisfy the Magistrate directly — commercial fraud, cheque bounce, false documents, defamation, domestic matters.
Consequence of Malicious Complaint
If a 156(3) / 175(3) complaint is found to be malicious, the complainant may face proceedings for filing a false affidavit. Under S.227 BNSS: if complaint is dismissed, the Magistrate may award costs to the accused and may pass an order for compensation. A frivolous complaint can result in costs and damage to the complainant's credibility in subsequent proceedings.
Which Court
Which Court — Jurisdiction Quick Reference
Complaints under Section 175(3) BNSS and Section 223 BNSS are filed before the Magistrate of the area where the offence was committed, where the accused resides, or where any part of the cause of action arose. In Delhi, Metropolitan Magistrate Courts handle these matters.
| Offence / Complaint Type | Court | Section | Location in Delhi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognisable offence — direct police (175(3) BNSS / 156(3) CrPC) | Judicial Magistrate First Class / Metropolitan Magistrate | S.175(3) BNSS / S.156(3) CrPC | Rohini, Karkardooma, Tis Hazari, Saket, Dwarka |
| Private complaint — Magistrate takes cognisance (223 BNSS / 200 CrPC) | Judicial Magistrate First Class / Metropolitan Magistrate | S.223 BNSS / S.200 CrPC | Rohini, Karkardooma, Tis Hazari, Saket, Dwarka |
| Offences exclusively triable by Sessions Court (e.g., murder, rape) | Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (commits to Sessions) | S.226 BNSS / S.204 CrPC read with S.193 CrPC | CMM Courts at each district HQ |
| PWDV Act complaint | Judicial Magistrate First Class | PWDV Act, 2005 — Section 12 | District-wise Magistrate Courts |
| POCSO Act complaint | Special Court (designated under POCSO) | POCSO Act, 2012 — Section 19/27 | Designated POCSO Courts, Delhi |
| Revision against dismissal of complaint | Sessions Court / Delhi High Court | S.442 BNSS / S.397 CrPC; S.528 BNSS / S.482 CrPC | ASJ Courts / Delhi HC |
CrPC vs BNSS
Old CrPC vs New BNSS — Key Changes
| Aspect | Old CrPC 1973 | New BNSS 2023 (from 1 July 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| Section for directing police investigation | Section 156(3) CrPC | Section 175(3) BNSS — substantively identical; same purpose and procedure |
| Section for private complaint before Magistrate | Section 200 CrPC — examination of complainant on oath | Section 223 BNSS — same procedure; Magistrate examines complainant on oath |
| Examination of witnesses by Magistrate | Section 202 CrPC — Magistrate may direct enquiry/investigation before issuing process | Section 225 BNSS — same power retained; Magistrate may postpone issue of process and direct inquiry or police investigation |
| Issue of process (summons/warrant) | Section 204 CrPC | Section 226 BNSS — same; court issues summons for summonable offences, warrant for warrant cases |
| Dismissal of complaint | Section 203 CrPC — Magistrate may dismiss if no sufficient ground | Section 227 BNSS — same; Magistrate records reasons for dismissal. Compensation may be awarded to accused for frivolous complaints |
| Savings for old cases | CrPC applies to all cases until 30.06.2024 | Section 531 BNSS: CrPC continues to apply to all proceedings pending on 30.06.2024. New BNSS applies to all proceedings initiated from 01.07.2024 onwards |
Procedure
Step-by-Step Procedure
Track A — Section 175(3) BNSS Route (Direction to Register FIR)
1
Prior Approach to Police (Essential)
Before filing a 175(3) BNSS petition, approach the concerned police station and submit a written complaint. If police refuse to register FIR, obtain a written refusal or note the date and manner of refusal. Also consider sending the substance of complaint to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS. Courts expect documented evidence of prior police approach before entertaining 175(3) petitions.
2
Draft Petition with Supporting Affidavit
File a petition before the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS disclosing: the cognisable offence committed; date, time, and place; names of accused; prior police approach and refusal; and prayer seeking direction to police to investigate under S.175(1) BNSS. Attach a supporting affidavit as required by Priyanka Srivastava (2015) — stating under oath that police were approached and refused. Attach documents establishing the offence.
3
Magistrate's Examination and Order
The Magistrate reads the petition and affidavit. If satisfied that a prima facie cognisable offence is disclosed and prior police approach is established, the Magistrate passes an order under Section 175(3) BNSS directing the concerned SHO / police station to investigate. The police are required to submit a report (Action Taken Report / ATR) to the Magistrate within the specified time.
4
Police Investigation and FIR Registration
On receipt of the Magistrate's order, the SHO is duty-bound to register the FIR and commence investigation. If the police still fail to act, the complainant may move the Magistrate for a contempt / compliance report. The police must submit an investigation report to the Magistrate within the time specified in the order. The complainant may appear as a witness in the subsequent trial.
5
If Petition is Rejected — Revision
If the Magistrate refuses to pass an order under S.175(3), the complainant may file a revision petition before the Sessions Court under Section 442 BNSS / Section 397 CrPC. If revision is rejected, a petition under Section 528 BNSS / Section 482 CrPC (inherent powers) may be filed before the Delhi High Court. The HC may direct the Magistrate to reconsider or pass appropriate orders.
Track B — Section 223 BNSS Route (Complaint to Magistrate)
1
Draft the Complaint
Prepare a written complaint under Section 223 BNSS / Section 200 CrPC addressed to the Magistrate. The complaint must state: name and address of complainant; name and address of accused (if known); facts of the offence; list of witnesses; reliefs sought (issuance of process, summons / warrant to accused). Attach supporting documents — agreements, messages, screenshots, medical reports, etc. depending on the offence.
2
Filing and Registration
File the complaint before the competent Magistrate. The court numbers the complaint and lists it for examination of the complainant. In Delhi, there are designated complaint filing counters at each Metropolitan Magistrate Court complex. Court fees may be applicable depending on the nature of complaint and relief sought.
3
Examination of Complainant on Oath — S.224 BNSS
The Magistrate examines the complainant on oath under Section 224 BNSS / Section 200 CrPC. The statement is recorded in the court's own hand or taken down and signed by the complainant. The Magistrate may also examine witnesses brought by the complainant (Section 225 BNSS / Section 202 CrPC). The examination is crucial — inaccuracies or contradictions can be used against the complainant later.
4
Magistrate Takes Cognisance or Directs Inquiry
After examination, the Magistrate either: (a) takes cognisance and issues process (summons / warrant) to the accused under Section 226 BNSS / Section 204 CrPC; (b) postpones issue of process and directs inquiry or investigation under Section 225 BNSS / Section 202 CrPC — to gather more material; or (c) dismisses the complaint under Section 227 BNSS / Section 203 CrPC if there is no sufficient ground to proceed.
5
Appearance of Accused and Trial
Once process is issued and the accused appears, the Magistrate frames charges (or discharges the accused if no case is made out). For summons cases, the accused enters a plea. Trial proceeds with prosecution evidence, defence evidence, and arguments. For warrant cases committed to Sessions, a separate committal process applies. In complaint cases, the complainant typically acts as the first prosecution witness.
Important Note
The two routes are distinct: Section 156(3) / 175(3) ends in a police investigation and a possible charge-sheet, while Section 200 / 223 keeps the matter as a complaint case tried by the Magistrate. Choose deliberately — once the Magistrate takes cognizance on a complaint, he ordinarily cannot later order a 156(3) / 175(3) investigation. A 156(3) / 175(3) application without the mandatory affidavit and prior police approach is liable to be dismissed (Priyanka Srivastava). For complaints against a public servant acting in official duty, the BNSS adds a two-tier safeguard — the superior’s report and a hearing — under Sections 175(4) and 223 (XXX v. State of Kerala, 2026).
Documents
Documents Required
Written complaint / petition with cause title and all facts
Affidavit of prior police approach and refusal (mandatory for 175(3) BNSS — Priyanka Srivastava)
Written police refusal / NCR receipt / copy of SP complaint (if available)
Correspondence — messages, emails, written communications establishing offence
Screenshots / photographs (timestamped) relevant to the offence
Medical reports / injury certificate (in cases of assault, cruelty, domestic violence)
Identity proof of complainant (Aadhaar / PAN)
Address proof of complainant and accused (if known)
Agreements, receipts, cheques, property documents (depending on offence type)
List of witnesses with names and addresses
Vakalatnama — authorising advocate to appear on complainant's behalf
Certified copy of any previous court orders in related proceedings (if any)
Practical Tip
Before filing under Section 156(3) / 175(3), exhaust the police remedy first — a written complaint to the SHO, then to the SP under Section 154(3) / 173(4) — and annex copies plus a sworn affidavit, or the application can be thrown out (Priyanka Srivastava). Set out clearly why police investigation is necessary (documents or witnesses beyond your reach), since the Magistrate must apply mind (Om Prakash Ambadkar). If the evidence is largely in your own hands, the Section 200 / 223 complaint route is often faster. During the transition, always cite both the CrPC and the BNSS sections.
Limitation
Key Points & Limitation
⏱ Key Points — Complaints 156(3) / 200 CrPC / 175(3) / 223 BNSS
Cognisable offences — no prescribed limitationNo limitation period for FIR / 175(3) complaints
Non-cognisable offences — Magistrate complaintLimitation Act 1963 does not apply to criminal complaints
Summons cases (S.223 BNSS) — offence punishable < 3 years3 years — S.467 CrPC / S.521 BNSS
Revision against Magistrate order90 days — S.442 BNSS / S.397 CrPC
BNSS applies from01 July 2024 — new matters only
S.531 BNSS savings — pending CrPC casesCrPC continues for cases initiated before 01.07.2024
Police Action Taken Report after 175(3) orderTypically 60–90 days per Magistrate's order
Typical Timeline — Complaint Proceedings in Delhi
2–8
Weeks
S.175(3) BNSS order directing police investigation — if petition is in order and prior police approach documented, Magistrate typically passes order within a few hearings.
3–6
Months
S.223 BNSS complaint — from filing to issuance of process (summons to accused). Includes complainant's examination, possible S.225 inquiry, and cognisance order.
2–5
Years
Full trial from complaint to final judgment — varies by court load, number of witnesses, and complexity of offence. Sessions cases take longer than Magistrate summons cases.
Applicable Laws
Relevant Statutes
Section 175(3) — Magistrate may order investigation · BNSS, 2023 (formerly S.156(3) CrPC)
“175. Police officer’s power to investigate cognizable case.—(3) Any Magistrate empowered under Section 210 may, after considering the application supported by an affidavit made under sub-section (4) of Section 173, and after making such inquiry as he thinks necessary and submission made in this regard by the police officer, order such an investigation as above-mentioned.” Predecessor — Section 156(3), CrPC 1973: “Any Magistrate empowered under Section 190 may order such an investigation as above-mentioned.”— Section 175(3), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (India Code); cf. Section 156(3), CrPC 1973
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Sections 173, 175, 223–227
Primary procedural code for criminal matters from 01.07.2024. Section 173: FIR registration. Section 175(3): direction to police to investigate (replaces S.156(3) CrPC). Section 223: private complaint before Magistrate. Section 224: examination of complainant on oath. Section 225: Magistrate may direct inquiry. Section 226: issue of process. Section 227: dismissal of complaint. Section 531: savings for pending CrPC cases.
IndiaCode →Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 156, 190, 200–204 (for pending cases)
Applies to all criminal cases initiated before 01.07.2024. Section 154: FIR for cognisable offences. Section 156(3): direction to police to investigate — replicated as S.175(3) BNSS. Section 190: cognisance by Magistrate. Section 200: examination of complainant — replicated as S.223 BNSS. Section 202: inquiry before process — replicated as S.225 BNSS. Section 204: issue of process. Section 203: dismissal of complaint.
IndiaCode →Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — Substantive Offences
Replaces Indian Penal Code 1860 from 01.07.2024. Governs substantive criminal offences — the BNS section must be cited in the complaint for offences committed on or after 01.07.2024. For offences committed before 01.07.2024, the corresponding IPC section continues to apply. Key sections for complaint cases: BNS Section 74 (hurt), Section 85/86 (cruelty by husband/relatives), Section 316 (breach of trust), Section 318 (cheating).
IndiaCode →Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12
The aggrieved person or any other person on her behalf may file a complaint under Section 12 PWDV Act before the Magistrate — for Protection Orders, Residence Orders, Monetary Relief, Custody Orders, and Compensation. The PWDV Act complaint runs parallel to any criminal complaint for the same conduct. A Protection Officer may assist in filing the complaint.
IndiaCode →Constitution of India — Article 226 / Section 528 BNSS / Section 482 CrPC
When a Magistrate refuses to pass an order or dismisses the complaint, the complainant may file a petition under Section 528 BNSS (inherent powers) / Section 482 CrPC (for old cases) before the Delhi High Court — or alternatively a writ petition under Article 226. The HC exercises supervisory jurisdiction and may direct the Magistrate to reconsider the complaint, register FIR, or pass appropriate orders.
Delhi HC →
Judgments
Landmark & Recent Judgments
1
Recent — Magistrate Not a Post Office; S.156(3) vs S.175(3) BNSS (2025)
Om Prakash Ambadkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Supreme Court of India | 2025 INSC 139 | JJ. J.B. Pardiwala & R. Mahadevan | Decided: 16.01.2025
A Magistrate is not a mere post office and must apply judicial mind before directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC — orders cannot be issued mechanically. Investigation should be directed only where police assistance is genuinely necessary and the cause of justice would suffer without it; if allegations are simple and straightforward, the Magistrate should proceed to record evidence and conduct trial directly under Section 200 CrPC. The Court also drew a detailed comparison between Section 156(3) CrPC and Section 175(3) BNSS 2023, holding that the BNSS changes (requiring prior SP approach, affidavit, and consideration of police submissions) merely codify existing judicial safeguards established by Priyanka Srivastava and Babu Venkatesh.
View on Indian Kanoon →
2
Recent — 2022
Babu Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka
Supreme Court of India | 2022 SCC OnLine SC 200 | (B.R. Gavai & Krishna Murari, JJ.) | Decided: 18.02.2022
Reaffirming Priyanka Srivastava, the Court held that a Magistrate ought NOT to entertain an application under Section 156(3) CrPC when it is not supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the complainant, and that the order under Section 156(3) must reflect application of mind and not be passed mechanically. Where the underlying dispute was essentially civil and the application lacked the mandatory affidavit, the consequential FIR and proceedings were liable to be quashed. A leading recent authority on curbing misuse of the 156(3) route.
Indian Kanoon →
3
Recent — Further Investigation Power (Post-Cognizance, pre-charge)
Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v. State of Gujarat
Supreme Court of India | Decided: 16.10.2019
A three-Judge Bench held that a Magistrate's power under Section 156(3), read with Section 156(1) and Section 173(8) CrPC, is wide enough to order further investigation even at the post-cognizance stage, up to the commencement of trial (framing of charge) — whether on an application or suo motu. To that extent it clarified the earlier understanding that such power ended at cognizance, strengthening the Magistrate's supervisory role over a defective or incomplete investigation.
View on Indian Kanoon →
4
Landmark — Affidavit Mandatory
Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Supreme Court of India | (2015) 6 SCC 287 | Decided: 19.03.2015
Held that an application under Section 156(3) CrPC must be supported by a duly sworn affidavit of the applicant, disclosing that the applicant had first approached the police under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) and been turned away. The Court observed that 156(3) applications were being filed in a routine manner only to harass, and the affidavit requirement makes the applicant accountable — a false affidavit exposes the applicant to prosecution. This safeguard now applies equally to Section 175(3) BNSS petitions for new cases.
Indian Kanoon →
5
Landmark — S.156(3) vs S.202 (Pre- vs Post-Cognizance)
Ramdev Food Products Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Gujarat
Supreme Court of India | Decided: 16.03.2015
Clarified the dividing line between the two routes a complaint can take. A direction under Section 156(3) (police investigation) operates at the pre-cognizance stage, where the Magistrate has not yet applied his mind to the offence. An inquiry under Section 202, by contrast, arises only after cognizance — when evidence has largely been collected and the only question left is whether there is sufficient ground to proceed. The mere fact that the complainant first approached the police does not bar a later Section 156(3) direction.
View on Indian Kanoon →
6
Landmark — Mandatory FIR
Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh
Supreme Court of India | (2014) 2 SCC 1 | Constitution Bench (5 Judges) | Decided: 12.11.2013
A Constitution Bench held that registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC where the information discloses a cognisable offence, and no preliminary inquiry is permissible before registration in such cases — the police have no discretion to refuse. A limited preliminary inquiry is permitted only in specified categories (matrimonial / family, commercial offences, medical negligence, corruption, and abnormal delay) where it is not at once apparent whether a cognisable offence is disclosed. This judgment is the cornerstone of the 156(3) / 175(3) remedy — it underpins the Magistrate's power to direct the police when they wrongly refuse to register an FIR.
Indian Kanoon →
7
Landmark — Discretion: Order Investigation (S.156(3)) or Take Cognizance (S.200)
Mona Panwar v. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Supreme Court of India | Decided: 02.02.2011
On a complaint disclosing a cognizable offence a Magistrate has two distinct options — either order police investigation under Section 156(3) at the pre-cognizance stage, or take cognizance under Section 190 and proceed under Chapter XV by examining the complainant on oath under Section 200. The choice is a matter of judicial discretion, and a Magistrate who adopts the Section 200 route instead of directing investigation acts well within jurisdiction; the Court deprecated adverse remarks made against the judicial officer for exercising that discretion.
View on Indian Kanoon →
8
Landmark — Remedy Ladder
Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Supreme Court of India | (2008) 2 SCC 409 | Decided: 07.12.2007
Held that where a person has an adequate alternative statutory remedy — approaching the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC and thereafter the Magistrate under Section 156(3) — the High Court should ordinarily not entertain a writ petition under Article 226 directly to order FIR registration. The complainant must first exhaust the statutory remedies. The Court also clarified that the Magistrate's power under Section 156(3) is wide enough to include the power to monitor the investigation and ensure proper investigation. Consistently followed by Delhi courts directing complainants to first invoke the 175(3) BNSS route.
Indian Kanoon →
9
Landmark — Application of Mind
Maksud Saiyed v. State of Gujarat
Supreme Court of India | (2008) 5 SCC 668 | Decided: 18.09.2007
Held that where jurisdiction is exercised on a complaint petition filed under Section 156(3) OR Section 200 CrPC, the Magistrate is required to apply his mind — a mechanical order forwarding the complaint to the police, without examining whether the complaint discloses the essential ingredients of the alleged offence, is bad in law. The Court also reiterated that there is no vicarious liability of directors / managing directors under the Penal Code in the absence of a specific statutory provision; the Magistrate must satisfy himself that the named accused are personally liable before directing investigation.
Indian Kanoon →
10
Landmark — Magistrate's Power
Mohd. Yousuf v. Afaq Jahan (Smt.) & Anr.
Supreme Court of India | (2006) 1 SCC 627 | Decided: 02.01.2006
Held that a Magistrate passing an order under Section 156(3) CrPC directing the police to register and investigate is not required to record elaborate reasons — such a direction is in the nature of a peremptory reminder to the police to exercise their statutory investigating power, not a judicial adjudication on merits. The order results in registration of an FIR. However, the Magistrate must still apply his mind and be prima facie satisfied that a cognisable offence is disclosed before issuing such a direction.
Indian Kanoon →
Recent Developments
Recent Developments
2024 — BNSS
BNSS Replaces CrPC from 01 July 2024
S.156(3) CrPC is now S.175(3) BNSS; S.200 CrPC is now S.223 BNSS. For all new cases from 01.07.2024, BNSS sections must be cited. CrPC continues for all pending matters under S.531 BNSS savings clause. Delhi courts are running both streams simultaneously.
2024 — Delhi HC
Dual Citation Required for Transitional Cases
Delhi HC practice directions require advocates to cite both CrPC and BNSS provisions for complaints filed in the transitional period (offences straddling 01.07.2024). Courts are accepting dual citations while the bar adapts to the new procedural framework.
2023 — SC
Zero FIR — Strengthened Implementation
Zero FIR — registration of FIR at any police station regardless of jurisdiction — has been codified under Section 173(1) BNSS. The SC has directed all states to implement Zero FIR strictly, reducing the need for 175(3) BNSS petitions in many cases where jurisdictional disputes were the reason for police refusal.
2026 — Supreme Court
Public-Servant Complaints — 175(3) / 175(4) / 223 Framework Clarified
In XXX v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 88) the Supreme Court delivered the first authoritative ruling on the interplay of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 175 BNSS. It held that Section 175(4) is neither a standalone provision nor a proviso to Section 175(3); a complaint against a public servant for acts in discharge of official duty must be supported by an affidavit, a report from the accused’s superior officer and an opportunity of hearing. Section 223 BNSS provides similar safeguards at the cognizance stage, building on Om Prakash Ambadkar (2025).
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Section 156(3) / 175(3) BNSS complaint and when should I file it?
A Section 175(3) BNSS (formerly 156(3) CrPC) petition is filed before a Magistrate when police refuse to register an FIR for a cognisable offence. The Magistrate, if satisfied, passes an order directing the concerned police station to investigate under Section 175(1) BNSS. The Magistrate does not himself take cognisance — the police investigate and the case proceeds as an FIR case. It should be filed after first approaching the police and being refused, and after approaching the SP under S.173(4) BNSS if possible.
What is the difference between a 156(3) and a 200 CrPC complaint?
Under S.156(3) / 175(3): the Magistrate directs police to investigate — Magistrate does not himself take cognisance. Under S.200 CrPC / S.223 BNSS: the Magistrate examines the complainant on oath, takes cognisance himself, and issues process (summons / warrant) directly to the accused — no police FIR is needed. The key difference: 156(3) uses the police investigation machinery; 200 / 223 bypasses police and directly engages the court. Both can be filed for the same offence.
Is it mandatory to approach the police before filing a 156(3) / 175(3) petition?
While not an absolute legal bar in all cases, the Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of UP (2015) 6 SCC 287 held that a 156(3) complainant must file a supporting affidavit showing prior approach to police and refusal. Filing a 156(3) petition without any prior police approach — without explanation — may weaken the petition and even invite adverse remarks from the court. Courts expect petitioners to have exhausted the police remedy before approaching the Magistrate.
If the Magistrate dismisses my 200 CrPC complaint, what can I do?
If the Magistrate dismisses a complaint under Section 203 CrPC / Section 227 BNSS, there is no direct appeal. The remedy is a revision petition before the Sessions Court under Section 397 CrPC / Section 442 BNSS. If the Sessions Court also does not provide relief, a petition under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS (inherent powers of HC) or a writ petition under Article 226 before the Delhi High Court can be filed. The HC may direct the Magistrate to reconsider the complaint.
Can I file both a 156(3) petition and a 200 CrPC complaint for the same offence?
Yes — there is no legal bar against filing both remedies for the same offence. A complainant may file a 175(3) BNSS petition and also file a 223 BNSS complaint before the same or different Magistrate. Courts have recognised that the two are distinct remedies and do not constitute double jeopardy at this stage. However, once an FIR is registered and charge sheet is filed under the 175(3) route, the 223 complaint may be consolidated or the court may consider trying them together.
Which BNSS sections replaced CrPC sections for complaints after 1 July 2024?
Key replacements for complaint purposes: S.154 CrPC (FIR) → S.173 BNSS; S.156(3) CrPC (direction to police) → S.175(3) BNSS; S.200 CrPC (examination of complainant) → S.223 BNSS; S.202 CrPC (inquiry before process) → S.225 BNSS; S.204 CrPC (issue of process) → S.226 BNSS; S.203 CrPC (dismissal) → S.227 BNSS; S.482 CrPC (inherent powers) → S.528 BNSS. For offences committed before 01.07.2024, the corresponding CrPC sections continue to apply under S.531 BNSS savings clause.
Is there a limitation period for filing a complaint for a cognisable offence?
For cognisable offences (for which FIR can be registered), there is generally no prescribed limitation period for filing a 175(3) BNSS / 156(3) CrPC petition or an FIR. For certain non-cognisable and summons-case offences under S.223 BNSS / S.200 CrPC, Section 467/468 CrPC (now S.521/522 BNSS) prescribes limitation — 6 months for offences punishable with fine only; 1 year for offences punishable up to 1 year imprisonment; 3 years for offences punishable up to 3 years. Serious cognisable offences have no limitation.
What happens at the Section 200 CrPC / 223 BNSS examination of the complainant?
The Magistrate examines the complainant on oath — the complainant is asked to state the facts of the offence, identify the accused, state where and when the offence occurred, and describe the evidence. The Magistrate records the statement in the court register. The complainant may also bring witnesses to be examined. This examination is a critical stage — inaccuracies can be used to challenge the complaint later. The complainant's advocate cannot speak during this examination; the Magistrate directly examines.
What is a Zero FIR and how does BNSS 2023 address it?
A Zero FIR can be registered at any police station regardless of territorial jurisdiction — it is then transferred to the concerned police station. The concept has been codified in Section 173(1) BNSS — any police station is duty-bound to register an FIR for a cognisable offence, even if the offence was committed in a different police station's jurisdiction. This reduces the need for 175(3) BNSS petitions in jurisdictional refusal cases. The Zero FIR is numbered and transferred within 15 days to the competent police station.
Can the accused get anticipatory bail after a 156(3) / 175(3) complaint is filed?
Yes. Once a 156(3) / 175(3) petition is filed and there is apprehension of arrest, the accused (or prospective accused) may apply for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS (formerly S.438 CrPC) before the Sessions Court or High Court. The court considers: the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, the possibility of fleeing justice, and whether the accusation appears to be made with malicious intent. Anticipatory bail does not prevent FIR registration but protects the accused from arrest for a specified period.
Self-Assessment
Complaints 156(3) / 175(3) — Test Your Knowledge
⚖ Complaints 156(3) / 175(3) BNSS — 20 Questions
Glossary
Key Legal Terms — Criminal Complaints
Cognisable Offence
An offence for which police can arrest without warrant and investigate without Magistrate's order — Schedule I CrPC / BNSS. Examples: murder, robbery, rape, cheating above threshold, theft. FIR must be registered mandatorily per Lalita Kumari (2014).
Non-Cognisable Offence
An offence for which police cannot arrest without warrant or investigate without Magistrate's order — Schedule I CrPC / BNSS. Information is recorded as NCR. Magistrate must direct investigation under S.155(2) CrPC / S.144(2) BNSS before police can act.
S.175(3) BNSS / S.156(3) CrPC Petition
Petition before Magistrate to direct police to investigate a cognisable offence. Magistrate does not take cognisance himself — he merely directs police. Affidavit of prior police approach mandatory per Priyanka Srivastava (2015).
Private Complaint — S.223 BNSS / S.200 CrPC
Complaint directly before Magistrate — Magistrate examines complainant on oath, may direct inquiry, and issues process to accused. Magistrate takes cognisance himself — no police FIR required at this stage.
Zero FIR
FIR registered at any police station regardless of jurisdiction — then transferred to the competent police station. Codified under Section 173(1) BNSS. Reduces need for 175(3) petitions in jurisdictional refusal cases.
Cognisance
The formal act by which a Magistrate or court takes notice of an offence and decides to proceed — by examination, inquiry, or process issuance. Under S.190 CrPC / S.210 BNSS: Magistrate takes cognisance upon receiving a police report, complaint, or suo motu information.
Process — Summons / Warrant
Court's direction to the accused to appear. Summons issued for summons cases (lighter offences — S.226 BNSS / S.204 CrPC). Warrant of arrest for warrant cases and when accused is unlikely to appear on summons. Bailable / non-bailable warrants depending on gravity.
Dismissal of Complaint — S.227 BNSS / S.203 CrPC
If Magistrate finds no sufficient ground to proceed after examination of complainant and witnesses, the complaint is dismissed with recorded reasons. No direct appeal — revision under S.442 BNSS / S.397 CrPC lies before Sessions Court.
Anticipatory Bail — S.482 BNSS / S.438 CrPC
Pre-arrest bail granted by Sessions Court or High Court to a person apprehending arrest for a non-bailable offence. Protects from arrest for a specified period or condition. Can be applied for once a 156(3) / 175(3) complaint is filed and arrest appears imminent.
Inherent Powers — S.528 BNSS / S.482 CrPC
Plenary powers of the High Court to prevent abuse of process of court or secure ends of justice. Used to quash malicious FIRs, direct registration of FIR, set aside illegal Magistrate orders, or intervene where statutory remedies are inadequate.
Was this page helpful?
Thank you — your feedback has been noted.
This is an informational guide and is reviewed periodically against the official sources cited above. If any provision appears outdated or an inadvertent error is noticed, it may be pointed out using the contact details on this page so that the content can be reviewed and corrected. Readers should verify the current statutory text and case law from authentic sources before relying on it.
