Sworn Affidavits and Proof of Police Refusal: The Paperwork a Section 156(3) CrPC Application Needs

When police refuse to register a First Information Report despite a cognizable offence being disclosed, many complainants turn to a Magistrate with an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking a direction for investigation. But a frequent mistake—sometimes fatal to the entire application—is filing such a petition without the supporting documents the courts now insist upon. So, what are the required documents to be attached with an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.?

The Core Rule Laid Down by the Supreme Court

In Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., (2015) 6 SCC 287, the Supreme Court noticed that Section 156(3) applications were being filed in torrents, often routinely and to harass accused persons 2023 0 Supreme(Chh) 47. To curb this misuse, the Court laid down two mandatory requirements:

1. A sworn affidavit must support the application. As the Court held: a stage has come in this country where Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. applications are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate 2015 3 Supreme 152.
2. Prior applications under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C., with both the aspects... clearly spelt out in the application and necessary documents to that effect shall be filed 2015 3 Supreme 152.

The rationale for the affidavit is that the applicant becomes conscious of the seriousness of the allegations, since a false affidavit exposes the maker to prosecution, thereby deterring casual invocation of the Magistrate's authority 2023 0 Supreme(Chh) 164.

Document Checklist for a Section 156(3) Application

Based on the binding precedents, a compliant application should generally include:

• The application itself, clearly stating that the complainant first approached the officer-in-charge under Section 154(1) and, upon refusal, the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3).
• A duly sworn affidavit of the applicant confirming this sequence of steps.
• Documentary proof of the Section 154(1) application to the station house officer—for instance, a copy of the written complaint lodged at the police station.
• Documentary proof of the Section 154(3) application to the Superintendent of Police, including copies of the representation sent and any acknowledgment or postal receipt.
• Evidence of refusal, whether express or implied, since refusal by the SHO is a sine qua non for maintaining an application under Section 156(3)

  Parshant Vashishta VS State of Chhattisgarh

  .
• Where a public servant is involved, the valid sanction order required under Section 197 Cr.P.C. 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 735.

The Affidavit Must Meet the Criminal Manual Standards

Merely attaching a solemn affirmation is not enough. Courts have held that an affidavit must substantially comply with paragraphs 5 and 8 of Chapter VII of the Criminal Manual:

• Paragraph 5 requires the declarant to specify what portion of the statement is made on personal knowledge and what portion is on information or belief, with sources disclosed 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 77.
• Paragraph 8 requires the officer administering the oath to certify that the affidavit was read, translated, or explained to the declarant and was understood 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 77.

In one decision, an application was rejected because the affidavit, though in the form of a solemn affirmation, does not substantially comply with the requirements set out in paragraph nos. 5 and 8 of chapter VII of the Criminal Manual 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 77. Similarly, in a company fraud matter, both revision applications were quashed because the Section 156(3) applications lacked the required affidavits and proof of prior Section 154(1) and 154(3) applications, amounting to an abuse of process 2024 0 Supreme(Cal) 1429.

Non-Compliance Can Prove Fatal

The consequences of skipping these requirements are serious. A Sessions Judge's order directing FIR registration was quashed as being without jurisdiction where the procedural safeguards laid down in Priyanka Srivastava had not been followed 2023 0 Supreme(Chh) 47. Courts have repeatedly stressed that a complainant must approach the Magistrate with clean hands, and intentional concealment of facts or procedural shortcuts will result in the orders and resulting FIRs being set aside 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 218.

The New Regime Under the BNSS

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has now codified these safeguards. Section 175(3) BNSS, which corresponds to Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., requires the Magistrate, before ordering investigation, to consider the complainant's application to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS supported by an affidavit, conduct such inquiry as deemed necessary, and consider the submissions of the concerned police officer 2013 8 Supreme 168 and 2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 33266. Failure to hear the jurisdictional police officer before ordering investigation renders the order liable to be quashed and remitted for fresh consideration 2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 18459.

Practical Steps for Complainants

• Approach the police station in writing first; keep a stamped or acknowledged copy.
• If refused, move the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3)/173(4) with proof of dispatch and delivery.
• Draft the affidavit with full compliance to Chapter VII of the Criminal Manual, separating knowledge from information or belief.
• Attach all correspondence and refusal evidence; do not conceal prior litigation or adverse findings.
• Remember the Magistrate must apply judicial mind—simply repeating allegations does not entitle an FIR direction 2022 0 Supreme(All) 188, and Section 156(3) powers are to be used sparingly 2020 0 Supreme(All) 694.

Key Takeaways

An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is not a shortcut around the police; it is an extraordinary remedy that demands a sworn affidavit, complete disclosure of prior applications under Sections 154(1) and 154(3), and documentary proof of each step. Under the BNSS regime, the affidavit and police-hearing safeguards are now statutory. Requirements may vary slightly by High Court practice, so the above is general information based on reported precedents and not specific legal advice—applicants should typically verify local procedural rules before filing.