Can police revoke an FIR? SC’s stay for CJP protesters sparks debate on legal process

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed all states not to take any coercive action against students who participated in the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led protests demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over the alleged NEET-UG 2026 paper leak.

The order comes amid growing demands from political leaders and student groups for police to withdraw FIRs registered against protesters. But can the police simply revoke or take back an FIR once it has been registered? The legal position is more nuanced than many believe.

An FIR marks the formal commencement of a criminal investigation. Once registered under the BNSS, it is no longer merely a dispute between the complainant and the accused. Instead, it becomes a matter involving the state, which is responsible for investigating the alleged offence and deciding whether prosecution is warranted.

Can the police revoke an FIR?

In most cases, the answer is no. The police cannot simply erase or cancel an FIR because the complainant or the government later wants the case withdrawn. Registration of an FIR triggers a statutory investigation, and the investigating agency is legally bound to examine the allegations.

However, the law provides certain mechanisms through which criminal proceedings may come to an end.

In case of the state, there is a provision that after a notification is issued by the Governor (Lieutenant Governor in case of Delhi), the cases are closed by the cops and no investigation is carried out after such circular.

Closure report after investigation

If the investigating officer concludes that no cognisable offence has been committed or that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute the accused, the police may file a closure report before the Judicial Magistrate.

The Magistrate is not bound by the police’s conclusion. The court may accept the closure report, reject it and direct further investigation, or even take cognisance of the offence if it believes sufficient material exists.

Compounding of offences

Certain offences are classified as compoundable under criminal law, allowing the complainant and the accused to settle the dispute. Once the court grants permission, where required, the criminal proceedings come to an end.

However, many serious offences — including those involving violence against public servants, rioting, or damage to public property — are generally non-compoundable and cannot be withdrawn merely because the parties reach a settlement.

Quashing by the court

The most common legal route for ending an FIR after registration is through the court’s inherent powers. The court may quash an FIR if it finds that continuing the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law or if the dispute has been amicably settled in cases where such settlement is legally permissible.

This power is discretionary and exercised on a case-by-case basis. Courts generally adopt a cautious approach, particularly where the allegations involve serious offences affecting public order or society at large.

What does this mean for the CJP protest cases?

With demands mounting to withdraw cases against students involved in the CJP protests, any decision will depend on the nature of the offences invoked in each FIR, the findings of the police investigation and, where necessary, the approval of the courts.

The Supreme Court’s interim direction against coercive action provides temporary protection to the students while legal proceedings continue. It does not, by itself, cancel or invalidate the FIRs already registered. Whether those FIRs ultimately survive will depend on the outcome of the investigation or any subsequent orders passed by the competent courts.