Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Mr. Ishan Nagar, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Aren, Adv. Mr. Sidhant Saraswat, Adv. Ms. Mugdha, Adv. Mr. Deshmukh Adith Satish, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. S.D Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, A.A.G. Ms. Sonali Gaur, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. (VC) Mr. Satyam Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Vikas Gogne, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tyagi, AOR Mr. Keshav Tomar, Adv. Mr. Ankit Verma, Adv. Mr. Aditya Verma, Adv. Mr. Nishank Tripathi, Adv. Ms. Harshita Sukhija, Adv. Ms. Priya Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Rishika Agrawal, Adv.

What are the requirements for an FIR to contain basic facts and allegations constituting a cognizable offence? What is the legal position regarding the misuse of law to settle personal scores through vague and speculative allegations? What are the rights of police authorities under Section 173(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to conduct a preliminary inquiry?

Key Points: - The Supreme Court held that while an FIR need not be an encyclopaedia, it must contain basic facts and allegations constituting the commission of a cognizable offence. (!) (!) (!) - Allegations of misrepresenting authority to engage in unethical business dealings may give rise to civil liability but do not constitute offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 without specific details. (!) (!) - The Court quashed the FIR because the allegations were vague, speculative, and lacked particulars, amounting to a fictional story rather than a prima facie case. (!) (!) (!) - Police authorities are required to exercise the option under Section 173(3) of the BNSS to conduct a preliminary inquiry when allegations are vague or inherently improbable. (!) (!) (!) - The High Court erred in dismissing the quashing petition by failing to consider that the FIR was bereft of particulars and based on uncertain allegations. (!) (!) (!) - The Court emphasized that for offences punishable between three to seven years, police must ascertain if a prima facie case exists before registering an FIR. (!) (!) (!) - The impugned order dated 26th November, 2025, rejecting the quashing petition is set aside, and all proceedings against the appellant are quashed. (!) (!) - The complainant-company, being a reputed media house, was under a greater onus to clearly set out relevant details prima facie establishing alleged criminal acts. (!) - The Court noted that the police acted with unusual expediency to register the FIR without verifying allegations or conducting a preliminary inquiry. (!) (!) - The case falls under the categories in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal where the allegations are so absurd that no prudent person can conclude there is ground for proceeding. (!) (!)

What are the requirements for an FIR to contain basic facts and allegations constituting a cognizable offence?

What is the legal position regarding the misuse of law to settle personal scores through vague and speculative allegations?

What are the rights of police authorities under Section 173(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to conduct a preliminary inquiry?