How to File an FIR for Criminal
Conspiracy to Commit Fraud Under BNSS 2023
Meta Description: Learn how to file FIR BNSS for conspiracy to commit fraud – Section 173 BNSS procedure, evidence needed, remedies if police refuse, and FAQs.
Introduction
A small business owner transfers ₹12 lakh to a “vendor” after months of convincing emails and fabricated invoices, only to find the vendor never existed. The first instinct is rarely “who do I sue” – it’s “where do I even report this.” Victims of financial fraud often delay approaching the police, fearing the matter will be dismissed as a civil dispute or that they lack the right paperwork.
That hesitation is costly. Every day of delay makes digital evidence harder to trace and the accused easier to disappear. Indian criminal procedure has, however, been substantially modernised. To file FIR BNSS for deception carried out through a coordinated scheme, the law now offers clearer, faster tools than before.
This guide is a practical roadmap to registering a Criminal Complaint India authorities are bound to act on, built around Section 173 BNSS – the provision that replaced Section 154 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). It covers the statutory framework, step-by-step registration, judicial safeguards, and common pitfalls that weaken fraud-conspiracy cases.
Understanding the Basics
What Is an FIR?
An FIR is the first formal record of information about a cognizable offence – one where police can arrest without a warrant and investigate without prior judicial permission. The term “FIR” is not itself defined in the BNSS; its effect flows from Section 173, which obliges an officer in charge to record information disclosing a cognizable offence and forward a report to the magistrate. It is not proof of guilt – it simply starts the official investigation.
What Is Criminal Conspiracy?
Criminal conspiracy arises when two or more persons agree to commit an illegal act, or a legal act by illegal means, followed by an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, this is consolidated in Section 61, restating the substance of the former IPC Sections 120A/120B. In fraud cases, conspiracy charges usually accompany the cheating charge whenever the scheme involved coordinated roles.
What Constitutes Fraud Under the New Criminal Laws?
What is commonly called “fraud” is prosecuted as cheating under Sections 318 and 319 BNS, replacing six overlapping IPC provisions (Sections 415–420). Cheating occurs when deception dishonestly induces another to deliver property, consent to its retention, or act to their own detriment. Section 318 carries enhanced punishment where the offender held a position of trust, and Section 319 separately criminalises cheating by personation. Where deception is the product of a planned, multi-actor scheme, Section 61 BNS is typically invoked alongside it.
Complaint vs. FIR
An FIR triggers immediate police investigation with powers of arrest, search, and seizure for cognizable offences. A private complaint before a magistrate, by contrast, involves the magistrate examining the complainant and witnesses before deciding whether to proceed – usually slower, and better suited to noncognizable matters or cases where police have already failed to act. For fraud-conspiracy victims, an FIR is generally the faster route.
Why FIR Registration Matters
Registration preserves the evidentiary timeline, activates investigation powers such as search, arrest, and account-freezing requests, and creates an official record courts and regulators rely on. Delay is frequently used by defence counsel to allege fabrication, so prompt registration protects the victim’s credibility.
Governing Law: BNSS 2023 and Section 173
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replaced the CrPC from July 2024, overhauling the procedure for investigation, arrest, trial, and sentencing.
Section 173 BNSS Explained
Section 173 corresponds to the old Section 154 CrPC and governs how a cognizable offence is reported:
- Sub-section (1): Information may be given orally or electronically, irrespective of where the offence occurred. Oral information must be written down, read back, and signed by the informant. Electronic information must be signed within three days to be officially treated as an FIR.
- Sub-section (2): A free copy of the recorded information must be given to the informant immediately.
- Sub-section (3): For offences punishable with three to seven years, an officer may — with DSPlevel permission — conduct a time-bound preliminary enquiry (within fourteen days) before registering the FIR, instead of registering immediately. This is a notable, debated departure from the earlier position.
- Sub-section (4): If registration is refused, the aggrieved person may write to the Superintendent of Police, who must investigate personally or direct a subordinate to do so.
The Zero FIR Mechanism
Section 173(1) codifies “Zero FIR”: a person can report a cognizable offence at any police station regardless of jurisdiction; the station registers it and transfers it to the station with actual jurisdiction. This is especially useful in cross-state financial fraud.
Relevant BNS Provisions
- Section 61, BNS — Criminal conspiracy.
- Section 318, BNS — Cheating, including enhanced punishment for breach of trust.
- Section 319, BNS — Cheating by personation.
- Sections 335–344, BNS — Forgery, often charged alongside cheating where documents are fabricated.
Magistrate’s Power Where Police Refuse:
Section 175(3) BNSS
If the Superintendent-of-Police route also fails, the complainant may approach a magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS (replacing Section 156(3) CrPC). The application must now be supported by an affidavit showing the SP route was attempted, and the magistrate must consider the police officer’s submissions before directing investigation — a more structured, though more demanding, safeguard than under the CrPC.
Step-by-Step Guide to Filing an FIR
Who Can File
Anyone with knowledge of a cognizable offence can file an FIR – not just the victim. A company, through an authorised officer, can file for corporate or investor fraud.
Where to File
The police station with jurisdiction over the offence.
Any police station, under the Zero FIR mechanism.
The state’s online FIR/e-FIR portal, where notified.
Documents and Evidence
- Identity proof of the complainant.
- Bank statements showing the money trail.
- Screenshots or printouts of the deceptive communications.
- Copies of agreements, invoices, or documents relied on by the accused.
- A clear, chronological account with dates, amounts, and each suspect’s role.
- Witness details, if any.
The Online FIR Process
Many states run e-FIR portals for specified offence categories, particularly financial crimes with an unknown or absconding accused. Under Section 173(1), an e-FIR must be signed within three days for formal recording. Where no portal exists, complaints can often be emailed to the jurisdictional station or lodged via the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal for online fraud, followed by an in-person FIR.
What Happens After Registration
The FIR is forwarded to the magistrate, a copy is given to the informant, and an investigating officer is assigned to record statements, gather evidence, seek account freezes, and eventually file a final report under Section 193 BNSS.
Rights of the Complainant
- A free copy of the FIR.
- Updates on investigation progress.
- Escalation to the Superintendent of Police if the investigating officer is inactive.
- A protest petition if a closure report is filed and disputed.
If Police Refuse to Register
- Insist on registration, citing the mandatory duty affirmed in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014).
- Write to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4).
- Approach the magistrate under Section 175(3), with an affidavit proving the SP route was attempted.
- As a last resort, approach the High Court under its writ or inherent jurisdiction.
Alternative Legal Remedies
Civil recovery suits, complaints to the RBI ombudsman (banking fraud), SEBI (securities fraud), or the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (company-law fraud) can run in parallel with the FIR.
Judicial Analysis: Key Precedents
Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014): FIR registration is mandatory once information discloses a cognizable offence, with preliminary enquiry permitted only in narrow categories (matrimonial disputes, commercial disputes, corruption, or abnormal delay). This remains the backbone of Section 173(1) and shapes how courts read the Section 173(3) exception.
State of A.P. v. Punati Ramulu (1993): Refusal to register an FIR despite disclosure of a cognizable offence is a dereliction of statutory duty — registration is not discretionary once the threshold is crossed.
Om Prakash Ambadkar v. State of Maharashtra (2025): Distinguishes Section 175(3) BNSS from the old Section 156(3) CrPC, holding that a magistrate must consider police submissions and confirm the SP route was attempted, recording reasons rather than mechanically reproducing allegations.
Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015): Its affidavit requirement for magistrate-directed investigation has now been statutorily absorbed into Section 175(3) BNSS.
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar (2000): Dishonest intention must exist at the time of inducement for an act to amount to cheating — a later failure to honour a promise, without deception at inception, is not cheating. This distinction matters where defence counsel argue the dispute is purely civil.
Practical Examples
Online Investment Scam: A fake trading platform lures investors with fabricated returns, then blocks withdrawals. The FIR should invoke Sections 318/319 BNS and Section 61 BNS (given coordinated roles among operators, “relationship managers,” and collectors), supported by screenshots, payment records, and KYC details of receiving accounts.
Property Fraud: A seller conspires with a document forger to sell the same plot twice using fabricated title papers. The FIR should cite cheating, conspiracy, and forgery under Sections 335–344 BNS, supported by sale documents and encumbrance certificates.
Business Fraud: A vendor and an internal employee conspire to raise fake invoices for undelivered goods. The company’s authorised signatory can file the FIR citing cheating and conspiracy, backed by audit findings and email trails showing collusion.
Banking Fraud: A loan syndicate colludes with a bank official to sanction loans against inflated collateral. This typically triggers parallel reporting to the bank’s vigilance department alongside the police FIR.
Critical Legal Analysis
The codification of Zero FIR and e-FIR removes longstanding jurisdictional excuses that once delayed registration, particularly valuable in fraud spanning multiple states, while the mandatory free FIR copy and clearer reporting timelines improve transparency.
Challenges remain. The preliminary enquiry under Section 173(3) — meant to filter frivolous complaints for mid-range offences — creates room for discretion that can delay registration if invoked loosely, in tension with the near-absolute duty affirmed in Lalita Kumari. Victims also struggle with identifying jurisdiction in cross-state transactions, preserving digital evidence before platforms purge data, and navigating unfamiliar online portals.
Digital evidence is easily challenged for authenticity unless properly certified; complainants should preserve original devices and obtain certification under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam’s electronic evidence provisions rather than relying only on printouts.
The added layers under Section 175(3) — the affidavit requirement and mandatory prior recourse to the SP — guard against misuse but risk making the remedy less accessible to genuine, unrepresented complainants. A recalibration that preserves these safeguards while easing the burden on first-time victims would strengthen the framework’s victimcentric intent.
Best Practices Before Filing an FIR
- Compile a clear timeline with dates, amounts, and named individuals before visiting the police station.
- Preserve original digital evidence, not just screenshots.
- Identify every suspected conspirator by name or description, even if roles are unclear.
- Consult a lawyer to frame both the cheating and conspiracy elements accurately.
- File promptly — delay invites arguments of afterthought.
- Keep copies of everything submitted, with acknowledgment receipts.
Mistakes That Can Weaken Your Criminal Complaint
- Treating the matter as purely civil and omitting the deception and conspiracy elements.
- Failing to specify each accused’s role, diluting the conspiracy charge.
- Submitting only screenshots without preserving originals or metadata.
- Waiting weeks or months without a credible explanation for the delay.
- Approaching the magistrate under Section 175(3) without first exhausting the police and SP route.
- Mixing unrelated civil disputes into the same complaint, inviting quashing challenges.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is Section 173 BNSS?
It is the provision governing registration of cognizable offences, replacing Section 154 CrPC. It mandates FIR registration when information discloses a cognizable offence, and provides for e-FIR, Zero FIR, and a limited preliminary enquiry for offences punishable between three and seven years.
2. Can I file an FIR online?
Yes, through state e-FIR portals for specified offences. Under Section 173(1), electronically given information must be signed within three days to be validly recorded.
3. Can police refuse to register an FIR?
No, not lawfully, where information clearly discloses a cognizable offence. If refused, escalate to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4), then the magistrate under Section 175(3).
4. What if the fraud happened in another state?
The Zero FIR mechanism lets you lodge the FIR at any police station, which must register and forward it to the station with territorial jurisdiction.
5. Can someone else file an FIR on my behalf?
Yes. Any person with knowledge of the offence — family, colleague, or authorised representative — can file it; the informant need not be the victim.
6. Is evidence mandatory before filing an FIR?
No. An FIR starts the investigation, not a trial. But available documents and a clear account speed up the process.
7. What happens after registration?
An investigating officer is assigned, evidence collected, statements recorded, and a final report filed — a charge sheet if evidence is sufficient, or a closure report if not.
8. How long does investigation take?
There’s no universal fixed timeline, though a preliminary enquiry under Section 173(3), where invoked, must finish within fourteen days. Multiaccused financial fraud investigations often take longer.
9. Can an FIR be withdrawn?
Not in the way a civil suit is withdrawn. A complainant can decline to support prosecution, and compoundable offences may be settled or quashed by the High Court under Section 528 BNSS.
10. Is there any fee for filing an FIR?
No. Registration and the first copy to the informant under Section 173(2) are free.
11. What if police register only a general complaint,not an FIR?
If the information discloses a cognizable offence, they must register an FIR, not a general diary entry. Insist on the FIR number and recorded document.
12. Do I need a lawyer to file an FIR?
Not mandatory, but legal assistance ensures both the cheating and conspiracy elements are accurately captured.
13. What if multiple people defrauded me together?
Name each person and their specific role — this supports invoking Section 61 BNS alongside the cheating provisions.
14. Can I file a civil case and an FIR simultaneously?
Yes, criminal and civil remedies can proceed in parallel.
15. What if the accused is based abroad?
An FIR can still be registered, with investigation proceeding via mutual legal assistance mechanisms, though cross-border evidence-gathering extends timelines.
Conclusion
The shift from CrPC to BNSS has modernised fraud and conspiracy reporting — Zero FIR removes jurisdictional excuses, e-FIR brings registration into the digital age, and the codified duty under Section 173 BNSS builds on the Supreme Court’s mandate in Lalita Kumari. At the same time, safeguards like the
Section 173(3) preliminary enquiry and the tightened Section 175(3) magistrate route mean complainants must be more procedurally careful — approaching the police first, documenting refusals, and escalating only when necessary.
For victims of coordinated fraud, the lesson is simple: act quickly, document everything, name every suspected conspirator, and frame the complaint to capture both the deception (Sections 318/319 BNS) and the coordinated scheme behind it (Section 61 BNS). Done correctly, an FIR under Section 173 BNSS remains the fastest, most powerful route to a formal legal reckoning for fraud conspiracies.
References
- Statutes
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 173, 175, 193, 528.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 61, 318, 319, 335–344.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Sections 154, 156 (for comparison).
- Constitution of India, Articles 21 and 226.
Case Laws
- Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1.
- State of A.P. v. Punati Ramulu, (1993) Supp (4) SCC 549.
- Om Prakash Ambadkar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2025).
- Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2015) 6 SCC 287.
- Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar, (2000) 4 SCC 168.
Government and Institutional Sources
- Bureau of Police Research and Development — SOP on Zero FIR and e-FIR.
- Ministry of Home Affairs notifications on BNSS implementation, 2024.
Legal Commentary
- LiveLaw — comparative analysis, Section 156 CrPC vs Section 175 BNSS.
- SCC Online Blog — analysis of Sections 173(3) and 175(3) BNSS.
This article is intended for general legal awareness and does not constitute legal advice. Readers facing an actual fraud or conspiracy situation should consult a qualified advocate before initiating criminal proceedings.
