‘Sensitive FIRs Need Not Be Uploaded Online’: Allahabad HC Allows Withholding FIR Copy

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that the Supreme Court’s judgment in Youth Bar Association of India (2016) allows withholding online publication of FIRs in sensitive cases such as terrorism, insurgency, sexual offences, and POCSO matters as it and directed that the petitioner may seek a copy of the FIR through the statutory grievance mechanism if she qualifies as an “aggrieved person".

Court disposed of a petition by Lucknow resident Abhihita Misra seeking unlocking of three cars, a copy of the FIR lodged in connection with a school-firing incident, and protection from police harassment.

The bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Babita Rani said the petitioner may apply for the FIR copy under the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India, and the competent authority must determine whether she is an “aggrieved person” entitled to receive it.

The petition followed an incident on October 31 in which unknown persons in a white vehicle allegedly fired inside the premises of a residential school at about 11:50 p.m. CCTV footage, police told the court, led investigators to the petitioner’s premises on November 2, where three white cars were found and locked. Two cars were later unlocked; one vehicle suspected to be involved was seized and taken to the police station.

Misra’s counsel told the court that nine police personnel had entered her home on November 2 and locked the cars without informing her of any offence. The petitioner argued that no FIR in the matter had been uploaded on the police website despite Supreme Court directions requiring online publication of FIRs.

The state produced General Diary entries and the Station House Officer of Sushant Golf City appeared before the court, explaining that the school manager initially feared lodging an FIR but filed one on November 3 under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, after receiving security assurances.

The bench observed that the Supreme Court’s judgment distinguishes ordinary FIRs from those involving sensitive offences, including sexual offences, terrorism, insurgency and POCSO, which need not be uploaded on the police website. Where a copy is withheld on those grounds, paragraph 11.8 of Youth Bar Association provides that an aggrieved person may disclose identity and submit a representation to the Superintendent/Commissioner, who must constitute a three-member committee to decide the grievance within three days.

Noting that the investigation is ongoing and identities of the suspects have not been established, the high court held the petitioner may apply under the prescribed mechanism; the competent authority will decide whether she qualifies as an “aggrieved person,” and if so, pass an order granting the FIR copy. The court added that the petitioner shall not be proceeded against without due process of law and disposed of the petition.

Case Title: Abhihita Misra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Of Homes Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others

Order Date: November 10, 2025

Bench: Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Babita Rani