CrPC Section 154 - Information In Cognisable Cases

Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”), deals with the manner of recording information about cognizable offences. A cognizable offence refers to serious crimes for which the police can start an investigation without the order of a court. The law requires that information regarding these offences - whether in oral or written form - be reduced to writing, read out to the informant, and signed by the latter. The substance of the information shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer. Therefore, Section 154 of the Code assists in ensuring access to justice with the creation of a system for mandatory and accessible registration of FIRs.

Legal Provision: CrPC Section 154- Information in cognizable cases

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.

   Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, [section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB,] [Inserted by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013] section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer:

   Provided further that-

   1. In the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, [section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB,] [Substituted 'section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D,' by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 (22 of 2018), dated 11.8.2018.] section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient place of such person's choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;
   2. The recording of such information shall be video-graphed;
   3. The police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Judicial Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (5A) of CrPC section 164 as soon as possible.
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, in the manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer-in-charge of the police station about that offence.

Simplified Explanation of CrPC Section 154

Sub-section (1): Recording Information

• Any information regarding a cognizable offence provided to the officer-in-charge of a police station must be recorded in writing.
• If the information is given orally, the officer must write it down and read it back to the informant.

• The informant must sign the recorded information, and the officer will note its substance in a book kept for this purpose.

  Special Provisions for Offences Against Women:

  • In cases of offences under sections 326A, 326B, 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB, 376E, or 509 of the IPC, a woman police officer or any woman officer must record the information.
  • If the victim is mentally or physically disabled, the recording should take place at the victim's residence or a convenient location, with the help of an interpreter or special educator if necessary.
  • The process should be video-graphed, and the officer should ensure that the victim’s statement is recorded by a Judicial Magistrate under Section 164 (5A)(a) as soon as possible.

Sub-section (2): Supplying a Copy to the Informant

• The officer is required to provide the informant with a free copy of the recorded information immediately.

Sub-section (3): Remedy Against Refusal to Record Information

• If the officer-in-charge refuses to record the information, the informant can send a written copy of the information to the Superintendent of Police.
• The Superintendent may either investigate the case himself or assign it to a subordinate officer.
• The investigating officer will have the same powers as the officer-in-charge of the police station for that case.

Practical Examples Illustrating CrPC Section 154

Following are some of the practical examples of how Section 154 of the Code works:

Illustration I:On theft

One Rajiv finds out that his motorbike has been stolen from outside his house. He immediately goes to the nearest police station and reports the case.

Application of Section 154: Rajiv gives oral information of the theft to the officer in charge at the police station. The officer prepares written information of Rajiv's statement, reads it over to him, to get it just and correct and then requests Rajiv to sign. The written information is entered into the record book at the police station FIR book. Rajiv gets a free copy of the F.I.R that he can use for insurance claims or further action on the case.

Illustration II: Reporting an offence by a disabled person:

Mr. Sharma, physically disabled, was assaulted in his house by one of his neighbours. Since Mr. Sharma wants to report the incident, he is not in a very feasible position to visit the police station due to his condition.

Application of Section 154: A police officer comes to the house of Mr Sharma for recording his statement. An interpreter accompanies him because Mr. Sharma has impaired speech. The statement is video-recorded to ensure authenticity.

The police officer prepares the FIR at the residence of Mr. Sharma himself and a copy is provided instantly to Mr. Sharma. Indexing of the case follows, along with further investigation.

Illustration III: Police did not file an FIR:

The laptop of Neha gets stolen from her car. She then goes to the police station to report the incident, but the officer in charge refuses to record her complaint because it is a minor issue. Application of Section 154: Neha writes a detailed complaint about the incident and sends it by post to the SP of the district.

SP goes through the complaint of Neha and finds it genuine; he issues the order for its investigation.

The above-mentioned examples explain how Section 154 of the Code provides that every person, depending upon his situation or the crime he is reporting, gets his case filed properly with the police and investigated under special consideration, whether the group involved is vulnerable.

Penalties And Punishments Under CrPC Section 154

Section 154 of the Code per se does not prescribe any punishments or penalties for failure to act in accordance with its provisions. But Section 166A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 prescribes refusal by a public servant to register cases involving certain offences against women. As per Section 166A, the public servant can be sent to imprisonment of up to two years with a fine if an officer fails to register an FIR in cases of crimes like sexual harassment, rape, or acid attack.

Notable Case Laws Related to CrPC Section 154

P. Sirajuddin vs. State of Madras (1970)

Even when the Code does not contemplate a preliminary inquiry, it is necessary in cases involving public servants so as to save them from undue injury to their reputation by baseless accusations. The court establishes the following principles regarding such inquiries:

• Fair play and justness: Inquiries shall be conducted without any preconceived idea of the guilt of the accused.
• Limited investigation scope: The investigation must be limited to the gathering of only such preliminary evidence based on which it is established if a prima facie case is made out.
• Formal investigation: In case enough evidence is gathered, an FIR should be filed, and a formal investigation must follow.

State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. (1990)

The Supreme Court laid down the guidelines as to when the extraordinary power of quashing of the FIR should be exercised, especially since the registration of the same under Section 154 of the CrPC. The court considered the cases deserving to be quashed as under:

• Absence of a cognizable offence: If no cognizable offence is committed and/or there is no sufficient cause for the police investigation.
• Absurd or improbable allegations: If the allegations themselves are inherently improbable, no prudent man would allow the proceedings to continue.
• Legal obstruction or alternate relief: If there is a legal bar to proceedings or an alternate relief is provided.
• Malafide: If the proceedings are initiated with malice or ulterior motive.

This power is exercised to prevent the abuse of the process of the criminal judiciary while allowing genuine investigation.

State of U.P. v. Nahar Singh (1998)

The Court explained an FIR basically requires to set in motion the mechanism of investigation. The key points of an FIR are as follows: 

• The FIR should make out the particulars of the offence committed and the persons concerned but need not be an encyclopaedic version.
• Minor omissions, such as not stating the exact role played or weapons used, etc. do not vitiate an FIR nor provide sufficient reason to discard it.
• An FIR is basically filed for the purpose of initiating investigation and, as such, is not expected to be a complete statement of the incident in itself. 

T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala (2001)

It has held that once an FIR is registered no other FIR can be registered regarding the same incident. The court has further explained what is to be done when more complaints are received in respect of the same incident. Without registering separate FIRs, such complaints also should be treated as further statements and support to the first FIR. This information can then be taken and added to the current investigation, in order to comprehensively investigate the incident using all evidence available.

Upkar Singh v. Ved Prakash, (2004)

In this case the court explained that although the ratio of earlier judgments of T.T. Antony case appeared to lay down prohibition against a second FIR, it does not relate to the genuine counter complaints. The emphasis by the court was as under:

• Counter-complaints are permissible: A second FIR is permissible on the grounds that there is a counter-complaint with a different version relating to the same incident.
• Police to register: Police must register the counter-complaint as an FIR and thus enable an aggrieved person to approach the Magistrate concerned with a complaint of his against the accused.
• Magistrate's interference: In case of refusal to register, a Magistrate should pass orders to register it and direct an investigation.
• Rationale: Allowing counter-complaints prevents unjust situations where the actual victim is denied justice due to a false FIR filed first. The CrPC should not create such anomalies.

Ramesh Kumari vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. (2006)

The ratio of this judgement is that Section 154 of the Code is mandatory. It casts an obligation upon the police to register a case based on a complaint filed by a person when a cognizable offence is alleged. This requirement must be fulfilled without the police officer's subjective satisfaction regarding the truthfulness or otherwise of the complaint. It was clarified that a “genuineness or credibility of information” is not at all a condition precedent for registration of a case, but it is relevant only after a case has been registered.

Parkash Singh Badal vs. State of Punjab (2007)

In this case, the court held that the police officer's concern is only with the “initiation of proceedings” and not with adjudging the “merit of the information”. It provided as follows:

• Compulsory registration: If the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the officer is bound to register an FIR. Non-registration is a breach of statutory duty.
• No preliminary enquiry: The officer has no power to conduct an enquiry into the correctness or otherwise of the information for determining the question of registration of the FIR.
• Remedies for refusal: If any officer in charge of a police station refuses to register an FIR, the aggrieved person may immediately send the substance of the information, in writing, to the SP concerned.

Aleque Padamsee vs. Union of India (2007)

The Court held that under Section 154 of the Code, the police officers are obliged to register an FIR on receiving information about a cognizable offence and shall not delay it for any reason whatsoever by evaluating the true believability of such information. It is held that the police must not go into the merits of the allegations; essentially, this is for the courts of law to decide.

For this, in case of a failure or neglect on the part of the police to register the same, the aggrieved party may approach a Magistrate under Sections 190 and 200 of the Code, who may direct the police to register an FIR and investigate the case if a prima facie case is made out. The court further holds that while it is possible to prefer a writ petition under Article 32, it would be more appropriate to approach a Magistrate.

Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P. & Ors (2013)

The Supreme Court has explained the statutory duty imposed on the police officer to register a FIR when a cognizable offence is reported and whether the police officials have the discretion to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR. Registration of FIR is a must if the information received shows a cognizable offence. But if the information itself does not show a cognizable offence, a preliminary inquiry is permissible only to the extent of ascertaining whether a cognizable offence has been committed or not. The Court has further identified some specific categories of cases in which police may conduct a preliminary inquiry, such as cases relating to matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, and medical negligence.

Recent Changes

Through the Amendment Act of 2013, the special proviso related to offences committed against women was introduced into Section 154. The Amendment Act of 2018 further broadened the horizon of the filing of information regarding offences committed against women.

Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides for the information in cognizable cases.

Summary

Section 154 of the Code provides that any information regarding a cognizable offence given to the police has to be in writing, read out to the informant and also signed by them. The statement should be recorded by a female officer only if the informant is a woman informing about specific serious offences; and special procedure in the case of disabled persons involves video recording of statements through interpreters or special educators. A copy of the report is made available to the informant free of cost, and in case of refusal by the police to file the same, the informant may immediately escalate the matter to the Superintendent of Police, who must ensure that the case gets investigated. The incorporation of special provisions related to vulnerable groups shows that the law has made a commitment toward inclusivity and protection for one and all.

Key Insights & Quick Facts

• Cognizable offences: Section 154 precisely deals with the reporting of cognizable offences, which are such serious crimes where the police may arrest without any warrant.
• Recorded as soon as possible: The information about a cognizable offence shall be intimated to the Police at the earliest.
• Oral/written information: If the information is in oral form, the police officer is supposed to write it and later read over it to the informant in order to verify the accuracy and get his signature on it.
• First information report (FIR): As soon as the receipt of information about commission of an offence from an informant, the information shall be entered in the FIR book maintained at the police station.
• Special provisions regarding women: If the informant is a female and the offence reported relates to a few specific crimes such as sexual assault, etc., her statement should be recorded by a woman police officer.
• Disabled persons: If the informant suffers from any mental or physical disability, recording of such statements by the police should be done at the residence of the informant or at a place of convenience and if necessary, with the assistance of an interpreter or special educator and the process should be video-taped.
• Free copy: As soon as the FIR is recorded, the informant shall be given a free copy.
• Procedure for escalation: If the police do not wish to enter the FIR itself in the register, then the informant - can send the complaint to the Superintendent of Police, who if satisfies that a cognizable offence has been committed, then either he can investigate himself or appoint some other officer to investigate the same.
• Legal obligation: This section puts a legal duty upon the police to enter in the record and investigate the cognizable offences. It ensures accountability in the processes of law enforcement.