Elucidating on the law relating to refusal to register an FIR by a Police Officer, the Orissa High Court has explained that as per section 175(3) of the BNSS, the Magistrate must consider the submissions of the concerned Police Officer in order to apply his mind judicially.

The grievance of the petitioner in this case was for a direction to the opposite Parties to register an FIR and take necessary action.

The Single Bench of Justice G. Satapathy clarified, “Time and again, the Apex Court has reiterated that in case the grievance of the petitioner is for non-registration of FIR, he has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate by invoking the provisions of law.”

Advocate R.D. Mohapatra represented the Petitioner while Addl. Public Prosecutor S.K. Rout represented the Respondent.

Reasoning

The Bench took note of the fact that the petitioner didn’t approach the Magistrate against his grievance of non-registration of FIR, but instead, he directly approached the High Court.

The Bench explained the approach of the aggrieved person for non-registration of FIR on his complaint as mentioned in Chapter XIII of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). Section 175(3) provides the powers to the Magistrate to order an investigation on the application of the aggrieved persons whose complaint has been refused by the police to register it as an FIR provided the aggrieved persons satisfy the Magistrate to direct for an investigation.

Reliance was placed upon a very recent decision of the Apex Court in Om Prakash Ambadkar Vrs. State of Maharashtra and others (2025) wherein it has been observed that before ordering investigation U/S.175(3) of BNSS, the Magistrate is required to consider the application, supported by an affidavit, made by the complainant to the Superintendent of Police U/S. 173(4) of the BNSS, conduct such enquiry as he thinks necessary and consider the submission made by the police officer.

“In view of the decision in Om Prakash Ambadkar (supra), it is mandatory for the Magistrate to consider the submissions of the concerned Police Officer, so as to apply his mind judicially while considering both the complaint and the submission of the police officer, thereby ensuring the requirement of passing reason order is complied with in a more effective and comprehensive manner”, the Bench held.

Thus, dismissing the Petition, the Bench concluded, “The petitioner is, however, at liberty to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.”

Cause Title: Swarnalata Jena v. State of Odisha and others (Case No.: CRLMP No.1633 of 2024)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate R.D. Mohapatra

Opposite Parties: Addl. Public Prosecutor S.K. Rout

Click here to read/download Order


Orissa High CourtJustice G. SatapathyBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha SanhitaCode of Criminal Procedure

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.