Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1 | AIR 2014 SC 187

Posted on March 5, 2026 by Admin

📘 Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh

(2014) 2 SCC 1 | AIR 2014 SC 187

Bench: Constitution Bench (5 Judges)
Coram: P. Sathasivam CJI, B. S. Chauhan, Ranjana Prakash Desai, Ranjan Gogoi, S. A. Bobde JJ.

1️⃣ Background of the Case

The case arose due to conflicting views of different Supreme Court benches regarding:

👉 Whether registration of FIR under Section 154 CrPC is mandatory when information discloses a cognizable offence
OR
👉 Police can conduct preliminary inquiry before FIR registration

The issue was therefore referred to a Constitution Bench.

2️⃣ Facts of the Case

The father of a minor girl alleged that:

The girl was kidnapped.
Police refused to register FIR despite complaint.
Instead police conducted an informal inquiry.

Therefore, the matter reached the Supreme Court.

3️⃣ Core Legal Issue

Whether police can refuse to register FIR when information discloses commission of a cognizable offence.

4️⃣ Statutory Provision Interpreted

Section 154 CrPC

“Every information relating to commission of a cognizable offence shall be recorded.”

The key question was interpretation of “shall”.

5️⃣ Supreme Court Holding

The Court held:

Registration of FIR is mandatory if information discloses commission of a cognizable offence.

Police cannot refuse registration.

6️⃣ Landmark Ratio

Mandatory FIR Rule

“Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.”

7️⃣ When Preliminary Inquiry is Allowed

The Court carved out limited exceptions.

Preliminary inquiry may be conducted in the following categories:

Category	Example
Matrimonial disputes	Cruelty complaints
Commercial offences	Business fraud
Medical negligence	Doctor liability
Corruption cases	Public servant misconduct
Abnormal delay cases	FIR after long time

8️⃣ Time Limit for Preliminary Inquiry

The Court directed:

Preliminary inquiry must be completed within 7 days
Reasons must be recorded.

9️⃣ Police Accountability

The Court held:

If police fail to register FIR:

Departmental action possible
Legal consequences may follow.

🔟 Important Guidelines Issued by Supreme Court

Rule	Principle
FIR mandatory	If cognizable offence disclosed
No inquiry before FIR	In normal cases
Inquiry allowed	Only exceptional cases
Inquiry time limit	Maximum 7 days
Reasons required	For conducting inquiry
Police liable	If FIR not registered

1️⃣1️⃣ Practical Judicial Test

Magistrates must ask:

Does complaint disclose cognizable offence?
If yes → FIR must be registered.
Police cannot verify truth before registration.

1️⃣2️⃣ Important Observations of Court

The Court emphasised:

“Registration of FIR is the first step in criminal justice process.”

And also stated:

“Truth or falsity of allegations is not a condition precedent for FIR registration.”

1️⃣3️⃣ Impact on Criminal Justice System

The judgment:

✔ Prevented police from suppressing complaints
✔ Strengthened victims’ rights
✔ Ensured transparency in investigation

1️⃣4️⃣ Relationship with Section 156(3) CrPC

If police refuse FIR:

The complainant can approach Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Magistrate may order registration of FIR.

1️⃣5️⃣ Important Case Laws Relied Upon

The judgment discussed earlier rulings including:

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Ramesh Kumari v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Aleque Padamsee v. Union of India

1️⃣6️⃣ Judicial Ratio (Ready Paragraph for Orders)

You can use this paragraph in orders:

“The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1 has held that registration of FIR under Section 154 CrPC is mandatory where information discloses commission of a cognizable offence. Preliminary inquiry is permissible only in exceptional categories such as matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, medical negligence, corruption cases and cases involving abnormal delay.”