Can an accused be denied a copy of the FIR? | Explained

The story so far: The Supreme Court on August 25, 2026, ordered the Ghaziabad Police to provide independent journalist Abhishek Upadhyay with a copy of the FIR and CCTV footage in a road-rage case registered against him. Mr. Upadhyay, who had reported on alleged irregularities in donations to the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, claimed that he was being falsely implicated over his reportage and that the police had failed to provide him with the FIR despite repeated requests.

Why did the court have to intervene?

On August 20, Mr. Upadhyay alleged that a police team arrived at his residence and informed him that a case had been registered at the Indirapuram police station over road rage and abusive behaviour. In a post on X the following day, he claimed that despite repeatedly seeking a copy of the FIR, the police initially sent him a page containing neither the sections invoked nor details of the alleged offence, and later shared an older FIR registered against him in Lucknow.

Mr. Upadhyay then approached the Supreme Court, alleging that the case was based on concocted allegations and intended to harass him for his journalism. He sought a copy of the FIR and quashing of the proceedings or, alternatively, transfer of the probe to an independent agency.

A three-judge Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant directed the Ghaziabad Police Commissioner to provide him with the FIR and CCTV footage and to file a compliance report by September 7. It also protected him from arrest and allowed him to approach the jurisdictional High Court for further relief.

What do statutory provisions stipulate?

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), does not expressly require the police to furnish the accused with an FIR immediately upon registration. Section 173(2) requires a copy to be given “forthwith” and free of cost to the informant or victim, but makes no mention of the accused.

The statute provides for the accused to receive the FIR only at a later stage, after the investigation culminates in the filing of a chargesheet before the magistrate. Section 230 requires the magistrate to furnish the accused with copies of documents relied upon by the prosecution, including the FIR and chargesheet, within 14 days of their appearance or production before the court.

The BNSS, however, does not address an accused person’s right to access the FIR before this stage, including during the investigation. The absence of an express provision to this effect has largely been addressed through judicial precedents recognising the right of an accused to obtain the FIR soon after its registration.

What have courts held on access to FIRs?

In Court on its Own Motion through Mr. Ajay Choudhary v. State (2010), the Delhi High Court laid down a mechanism for an accused to obtain an FIR during the investigation, before the stage contemplated under Section 230 of the BNSS. The accused or an authorised relative can apply to the Station House Officer (SHO), who must forward the request with reasons to the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) for a decision within seven working days. A refusal can be challenged before a senior police officer, who must pass a reasoned order after considering the nature of the allegations and the stage of the investigation.

The ruling also made FIRs more readily accessible by directing the Delhi Police to upload them on its website within 24 hours of registration. FIRs involving sensitive offences can, however, be withheld through a reasoned decision by an officer not below the rank of DCP.

In Rama Nand Rathore v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2014), the Himachal Pradesh High Court similarly held that a person who suspects that they have been named in an FIR can seek a certified copy from the police, which must be supplied within 24 hours. It also directed FIRs to be uploaded online within the same period, barring sensitive cases.

What did the Supreme Court direct?

In Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India (2016), the Supreme Court gave these directives pan-India effect and reiterated that an accused is entitled to access the FIR before the stage prescribed under Section 207 of the CrPC (now Section 230 of the BNSS).

The court directed that FIRs be uploaded on police websites within 24 hours of registration or, where no such website exists, on the official website of the State government. Where geographical connectivity problems or other unavoidable difficulties prevent publication within 24 hours, the deadline can be extended to 48 hours. For geographical connectivity problems, it can be extended further, up to 72 hours.

An accused can apply through a representative to the police officer concerned or the Superintendent of Police (SP) for a certified copy, which must be supplied within 24 hours. Once the FIR is forwarded to the jurisdictional magistrate or a Special Judge, the accused can also apply directly to the court and obtain a copy within two working days.

The court, however, carved out an exception to the online publication requirement for FIRs involving offences “sensitive in nature”.

What is the ‘sensitive offence’ exemption?

The apex court identified sexual offences, cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and terror offences as examples of “sensitive” offences, while clarifying that the list was not exhaustive. Such FIRs can be withheld from online publication, having regard to privacy and the nature of the case.

The decision, however, cannot be taken by a police officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) or its equivalent. A person aggrieved by it can approach the Superintendent of Police or an equivalent officer, who must constitute a three-member committee to decide the grievance within three days.

Even where an FIR is withheld on grounds of sensitivity, the accused or an authorised representative can apply for a certified copy to the magistrate to whom the FIR has been forwarded, who must provide it promptly and within three days. Notably, an accused need not first approach the police before seeking a copy from the magistrate.

What are the implications?

Delhi-based advocate Nipun Saxena says police officials routinely fail to comply with the Supreme Court’s directive to upload FIRs through the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS), the police database through which FIRs are made publicly available. “Once an FIR is registered and the criminal law is set in motion, the accused becomes entitled to seek pre-trial remedies such as quashing of the FIR or anticipatory bail. Without access to the FIR, these remedies cannot be effectively pursued,” he says.

Mr. Saxena adds that the Supreme Court’s ruling recognised that an accused cannot be made to wait until the framing of charges to know the offences alleged against them, as this would undermine the right to a fair trial and the principles of natural justice. “The enactment of the new criminal laws was an opportunity to address this omission by expressly providing for the accused to receive a copy of the FIR at an early stage. Unfortunately, no such provision was introduced,” he says.