Delay in Registration of FIR & Its Impacts on Criminal Justice System
Written By: Ms. Sania Saleem
Introduction
The Rule of Law is rightly considered a prerequisite for good governance in every country. A.V. Dicey, a renowned constitutional theorist, identified the supremacy of regular law and equality before the law as fundamental principles of the Rule of Law.
The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, also recognises the importance of the Rule of Law through numerous constitutional provisions.
For instance, Article 4 guarantees the right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with the law, while Article 5 establishes the obligation of obedience to the Constitution and law.
Despite these constitutional guarantees, Pakistan continues to face serious challenges in ensuring effective implementation of the Rule of Law.
According to the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index 2022, Pakistan ranked 129th out of 140 countries, reflecting serious weaknesses in the country’s legal and institutional framework.
The existence or absence of the Rule of Law cannot be attributed to any single factor. However, one significant issue affecting Pakistan’s criminal justice system is the delay in registration of the First Information Report (FIR).
The registration of an FIR plays a fundamental role in initiating criminal proceedings. Unnecessary delays can weaken investigations, compromise evidence, obstruct justice and undermine public confidence in law-enforcement institutions.
Legal Framework for FIR Registration in Pakistan
A First Information Report is an important document in Pakistan’s criminal justice system.
Although an FIR is not substantive evidence by itself, it may be used to corroborate or contradict evidence during criminal proceedings, subject to applicable legal requirements.
The legal framework governing FIR registration principally includes:
- Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (CrPC)
- Rule 24.1 of the Police Rules
Section 154 CrPC requires information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, when given to the officer in charge of a police station, to be recorded in the manner prescribed by law.
The information must be reduced to writing where necessary, read over to the informant, signed as required and entered into the relevant official record.
The purpose of this provision is to ensure that information disclosing a cognizable offence is formally recorded so that lawful investigation can begin.
FIR: Information of a Crime Given to Set Police Investigation in Motion
A criminal investigation ordinarily begins when information regarding a cognizable offence is formally brought before the police and the relevant legal process is initiated.
The primary purpose of an FIR is to set the machinery of criminal law in motion.
An FIR is not expected to contain every detail relating to the alleged offence. Rather, it provides the essential information necessary for initiating an investigation.
Its importance lies in establishing an early record of the alleged occurrence and enabling investigating authorities to take timely action.
Prompt registration is therefore important for:
- Preserving evidence
- Identifying potential suspects
- Locating witnesses
- Preventing offenders from escaping
- Initiating lawful investigation
- Reducing opportunities for fabrication or manipulation
- Protecting the rights of victims and accused persons
Unnecessary delays can adversely affect these objectives and create serious complications during subsequent criminal proceedings.
“Justice delayed is justice denied.”
Why Does FIR Registration Get Delayed?
Although the law establishes procedures for recording information about cognizable offences, delays in FIR registration remain a recurring problem.
Several administrative, institutional, social and political factors contribute to this issue.
1. Avoidance of Additional Workload
Police officers may sometimes avoid or delay registering FIRs to escape additional investigative responsibilities.
Once a cognizable offence is formally recorded, the police must undertake the relevant legal procedures and investigative responsibilities.
Where police stations suffer from staff shortages, excessive workload or inadequate resources, officers may become reluctant to register additional cases.
2. Concealing Poor Performance
The number of registered criminal cases is sometimes treated as an indication of the law-and-order situation within a police station’s jurisdiction.
A greater number of registered FIRs may be interpreted as evidence of rising criminal activity.
Consequently, some police officials may attempt to reduce officially recorded crime figures by discouraging complaints or delaying registration.
This practice can create a misleading impression of improved security while preventing victims from accessing justice.
3. Political and Social Influence
Political pressure and the influence of powerful individuals can also obstruct FIR registration.
Persons possessing significant political, social or economic influence may attempt to prevent criminal proceedings against themselves or their associates.
Such interference undermines the principles of equality before the law and impartial administration of justice.
4. Institutional Weaknesses
Inadequate supervision, limited accountability, insufficient training and weak complaint-management systems can contribute to delays.
When police personnel are not effectively monitored, victims may struggle to ensure compliance with statutory duties.
Three Major Types of Delay in FIR Registration
Delays relating to FIR registration and processing can generally be divided into three categories.
1. Delay on the Part of the Informant
The first category occurs when the complainant or informant fails to report the alleged offence promptly.
Such delays may arise from:
- Fear of retaliation
- Social pressure
- Lack of legal awareness
- Family or community intervention
- Difficulty accessing a police station
- Attempts to resolve the matter privately
Although some delays may have reasonable explanations, unexplained delays can become relevant when courts evaluate the reliability of an allegation.
2. Delay Caused by the Police
The second category involves delay by police officials after receiving information about a cognizable offence.
Such delay may result from administrative reluctance, misconduct, pressure from influential individuals or attempts to avoid investigative responsibilities.
Unjustified refusal or delay can prevent timely collection of evidence and frustrate the criminal justice process.
3. Delay in Dispatching the FIR to the Magistrate
The third category concerns delays in forwarding the relevant report to the competent magistrate.
Timely compliance with statutory reporting requirements helps maintain procedural transparency and protects the integrity of criminal proceedings.
Unexplained delay in forwarding relevant records may create questions about possible manipulation or subsequent changes to the reported account.
Can Police Refuse to Register an FIR?
Under Section 154 CrPC, the essential requirement is that the information should disclose the commission of a cognizable offence.
At the registration stage, the police are not ordinarily required to conduct a full investigation into whether the allegations will ultimately be proved.
The credibility of witnesses, reliability of evidence and guilt or innocence of the accused are matters to be examined through the investigation and judicial process.
Therefore, where the statutory requirements for registration are satisfied, the police should not refuse to perform their legal duty merely because the allegations have not yet been independently verified.
At the same time, registration of an FIR does not establish the guilt of any person named in it.
Impacts of Delay in FIR Registration on the Criminal Justice System
Unnecessary delay in FIR registration creates multiple challenges for victims, investigators, prosecutors and courts.
1. Increased Risk of Evidence Destruction
Physical and documentary evidence may be lost, altered or destroyed when criminal proceedings are unnecessarily delayed.
Suspects may also obtain opportunities to remove relevant material or interfere with potential evidence.
2. Greater Possibility of Fabricated Allegations
An unexplained delay can create opportunities for deliberation, consultation and subsequent modification of the original account.
Such circumstances may raise questions about whether the allegations reflect the actual occurrence or were developed after consultation with interested persons.
3. Weakening of Witness Testimony
As time passes, witnesses may forget important details or become vulnerable to pressure, intimidation or influence.
This can weaken the reliability and consistency of testimony during legal proceedings.
4. Difficulty in Proving Criminal Charges
Criminal cases generally require the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Where essential evidence is compromised because of unnecessary delay, prosecutors may face greater difficulty establishing the alleged offence.
5. Opportunities for Offenders to Escape
Delayed police action may give suspected offenders additional time to flee, conceal evidence or avoid investigation.
6. Erosion of Public Confidence
When citizens repeatedly experience difficulties in registering complaints, confidence in police institutions and the wider criminal justice system may decline.
This can discourage future reporting of criminal offences and increase public frustration with law-enforcement institutions.
Judicial Perspective: Nazo v. The State (2021)
In Nazo v. The State (2021), the court highlighted the importance of prompt FIR registration and the need to examine unexplained delays carefully.
“The main object of prompt registration of the FIR is to rule out the possibility of deliberation, consultation and inquiry.”
The judgment, as discussed in the source article, emphasised that delays in reporting an alleged crime may require judicial caution because of the possibility of involving innocent persons through subsequent deliberation or consultation.
The principle does not mean that every delayed FIR is necessarily false. Rather, the circumstances and explanation for the delay must be examined alongside the available evidence.
Prompt registration therefore supports both effective investigation and protection against potential manipulation.
The Other Side: Registration of Groundless FIRs
Although unnecessary delay in FIR registration is a serious concern, the registration of baseless allegations can also produce injustice.
False or malicious criminal accusations may expose innocent individuals to:
- Unnecessary investigation
- Damage to reputation
- Financial hardship
- Psychological distress
- Unwarranted arrest or detention
- Prolonged litigation
The criminal justice system must therefore maintain a balance between prompt registration of cognizable offences and protection against misuse of criminal proceedings.
The central distinction is that registration of information does not amount to a judicial determination of guilt.
Investigators must examine the allegations independently and objectively rather than treating the complainant’s initial account as established fact.
Registration, Investigation and Cancellation of FIR
Once an FIR has been registered, the matter enters a formal legal process.
However, registration does not necessarily mean that the allegations will ultimately result in prosecution or conviction.
Where an investigation establishes that allegations are baseless, insufficiently supported or otherwise legally unsustainable, the appropriate statutory procedures may be followed.
The source article discusses Section 157(2) CrPC in relation to circumstances where investigation may not be undertaken or proceeded with, subject to the requirements of law.
Similarly, the formal cancellation or quashing of an FIR involves established legal procedures and cannot simply be treated as an informal administrative decision.
These safeguards are important because both unjustified refusal to register complaints and misuse of registered FIRs can undermine justice.
Sughran Bibi Case (2018): A Landmark Judgment
The Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed important aspects of FIR registration and criminal investigation in the landmark Sughran Bibi case (2018).
The judgment clarified that an FIR represents the first version of an alleged occurrence brought before the police.
Its contents should not determine the ultimate findings of the investigation.
The investigating officer must independently examine the circumstances, evaluate the evidence and establish the facts.
The principal lesson is that an FIR is the starting point of investigation, not the final account of what occurred.
This distinction is essential for ensuring fairness to complainants, victims and accused persons.
Legal Remedies Against Refusal to Register an FIR
Pakistan’s legal framework provides mechanisms for seeking relief when police officials fail to perform their statutory duties.
Sections 22-A and 22-B of the CrPC
Sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, provide an important mechanism for addressing certain complaints concerning police conduct and the non-registration of criminal cases.
An ex-officio Justice of Peace may issue appropriate directions concerning police neglect, failure or excess in the performance of duties, within the powers recognised by law.
This mechanism can provide relief where a complainant alleges that police officials have unjustifiably refused to register information relating to a cognizable offence.
Judicial Guidance on Sections 22-A and 22-B
The source article refers to a decision reported as 2020 PCr.LJ Peshawar 1155, which emphasised that the relevant provisions should not be used as shortcuts to ordinary legal procedures.
Rather, they are intended to address situations where police authorities avoid performing their legal responsibilities.
Role of Police Complaint Mechanisms
Internal complaint procedures and police grievance-redressal mechanisms can also provide an avenue for challenging unjustified refusal or delay.
The source article discusses directions associated with the National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee regarding the use of available complaint mechanisms before seeking certain forms of judicial intervention.
However, procedural requirements must be applied in accordance with the governing law and applicable judicial directions.
Complaint-redressal arrangements should facilitate justice rather than create additional unnecessary obstacles for victims.
Way Forward: Reforms to Improve FIR Registration
Improving the FIR registration process requires institutional accountability, legal awareness, administrative efficiency and professional development within police organisations.
1. Strengthen Police Accountability
Police officers responsible for unjustified refusal or delay should be subject to effective internal accountability mechanisms.
Regular supervision and transparent complaint-review procedures can discourage misconduct.
2. Introduce Public Satisfaction Mechanisms
Police performance should not be evaluated solely on the number of registered criminal cases.
Authorities should also assess:
- Public satisfaction
- Accessibility of police services
- Professional conduct
- Complaint resolution
- Timeliness of registration
- Quality of investigation
Such mechanisms could improve the relationship between police institutions and the public.
3. Improve Training and Capacity Building
Police personnel should receive continuous training in criminal procedure, evidence handling, constitutional rights and professional ethics.
Capacity building must accompany legal reforms if improvements are to be effectively implemented.
4. Strengthen Human Resource Development
Police stations require sufficient trained personnel, operational resources and administrative support.
Reducing unnecessary workload can help ensure that officers do not avoid registering cases merely because of additional investigative responsibilities.
5. Promote Alternative Dispute Resolution
An effective Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) framework can help resolve appropriate civil disputes without unnecessarily converting them into criminal allegations.
However, ADR should not be used to obstruct the lawful registration or investigation of genuine cognizable offences.
6. Improve Complaint-Redressal Systems
Accessible complaint mechanisms should provide timely relief against police refusal, delay and misconduct.
Procedures should be simple, transparent and accessible to ordinary citizens.
7. Strengthen Institutional Oversight
Independent evaluation and improved internal monitoring can help identify recurring administrative weaknesses.
Greater accountability should promote both timely FIR registration and impartial investigation.
8. Protect Against False and Malicious Allegations
Reforms should also ensure that registration does not automatically result in unnecessary arrest or unjustified treatment of accused persons.
The distinction between initial allegations and legally established guilt must remain central to criminal procedure.
Conclusion
Delay in registration of an FIR represents a serious challenge to the effective administration of criminal justice in Pakistan.
An FIR serves as an important first step in initiating the formal investigative process. Unnecessary delay can result in evidence being lost, witnesses becoming unavailable, offenders escaping and criminal proceedings becoming more difficult to prove.
At the same time, the justice system must prevent the misuse of FIR registration through false or malicious allegations.
Sections 154, 157, 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, along with relevant judicial precedents, provide important legal principles concerning registration, investigation, police responsibility and available remedies.
However, meaningful improvement requires more than legislation alone.
Pakistan must strengthen police accountability, improve institutional capacity, modernise complaint mechanisms, promote appropriate alternative dispute resolution and invest in human resource development.
Effective implementation of these measures would improve the credibility of law-enforcement institutions and contribute to the wider objectives of good governance and the Rule of Law.
Ultimately, prompt and lawful FIR registration is essential because justice cannot be effective when the
