TL;DR: An FIR is not the only door. If the police will not register one, you can ask a magistrate to order an investigation under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, press the platform through the IT Rules grievance machinery, and — for defamation or privacy — go to a civil court for an injunction or damages. The FIR is still the fastest route to subscriber details and a chargesheet, so the usual sensible move is to start it and keep the other options alive at the same time.
Most people who ring up about online abuse have already stood at a police station counter once. They described the messages, handed over printouts, and left with either a verbal "we will look into it" or a receipt with no crime number on it. Three weeks later, nothing. The messages are still coming, or the account is still up, and the question has narrowed to a single practical thing: what can be done when there is no FIR.
This piece is written from the general shape of those complaints. Where the account you are complaining about belongs to someone you know, where a matrimonial dispute is already running, or where you have posted about the person yourself, the picture changes — and the police will notice that early. We only ever have one side of the story when someone first writes in.
Key facts at a glance
- A refusal to register an FIR is not the end. Section 175(3) of the BNSS lets a magistrate direct an investigation.
- Get everything in writing. A written complaint with a date and a receiving stamp is the foundation for every later step.
- Offences in these cases usually sit across the BNS (stalking, criminal intimidation, defamation, insulting modesty) and the IT Act (identity theft, personation, privacy, obscene publication).
- Section 66A of the IT Act was struck down in 2015 and no longer exists. Do not build a complaint on it.
- Platforms have their own clock: acknowledge a grievance in 24 hours, resolve it in 15 days, and remove unlawful content within 36 hours of a court or government order.
- Civil defamation has a one-year limitation from publication. Miss it and that remedy is gone.
- Criminal courts do not have a general "delete this from the internet" power, but injunctions against unknown defendants are granted in practice.
What Can You Actually Do About Cyber Harassment Without FIR?
The honest answer is that you have four routes, and they are not alternatives. They run side by side, at different speeds.
Step 1: Put the complaint in writing and get a receipt
Go back, or go to a different police station. Hand over a written complaint — printed, signed, dated — describing what was posted, when, on which account, and what it has caused you. Ask for a receipt. Under Section 173 of the BNSS, information about a cognizable offence can be given at any police station; if that station lacks jurisdiction, it must be transferred to the correct one. This is what people call a zero FIR. Insist, politely and repeatedly, on a written acknowledgment with a number on it even if it is only a general diary entry.
Step 2: Escalate in writing to the Superintendent of Police
If the station will not register the case, send the substance of the complaint in writing to the Superintendent of Police of the district. The BNSS carries forward the old Code's escalation route. Send it by registered post or speed post and keep the receipt. It costs you a stamp and twenty minutes, and it converts your oral complaint into a document that exists in an official file.
Step 3: Move the magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS
This is the route most people have never heard of, and it is the one that works when the police simply will not act. You file an application before the Judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction, setting out the facts, annexing the complaint you gave the police and the proof that you gave it, and asking the magistrate to direct an investigation. The magistrate can order it. In practice this is done through an advocate, with an affidavit and a set of annexures.
Two cautions. First, the magistrate will not order an investigation into something that does not disclose a cognizable offence on its face, so the application has to be drafted as a legal document, not as a grievance. Second, the order is not the end — the police still have to investigate, and orders can be challenged. Budget weeks rather than days.
Step 4: If the offence is non-cognizable, file a complaint case
Some of what happens online — a single insulting message, for instance — may be non-cognizable, which means the police cannot register an FIR without a magistrate's permission. In that situation you file a private complaint before the magistrate, who examines you on oath and decides whether to take cognizance. This is slower than an FIR and does not bring police investigation machinery with it, but it is a real remedy and it creates a court record.
Which offences are usually involved
Which section applies depends entirely on what was actually said or posted. The ones that come up most often:
- Stalking, including monitoring a woman's use of the internet, under Section 78 of the BNS.
- Criminal intimidation, including threats sent anonymously, under Section 351 of the BNS.
- Insulting the modesty of a woman under Section 79 of the BNS.
- Voyeurism under Section 77 of the BNS, where images were captured in a private setting.
- Defamation under Section 356 of the BNS, which is a criminal offence as well as a civil wrong.
- Identity theft under Section 66C of the IT Act and cheating by personation under Section 66D, which cover fake profiles and impersonation.
- Violation of privacy under Section 66E of the IT Act.
- Publishing obscene or sexually explicit material under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act.
Section 66A of the IT Act is not on that list for a reason. The Supreme Court struck it down, and complaints that lean on it get dismissed. But Sections 67 and 67A survive and are frequently the correct charging provision where intimate images are involved.
Timelines matter here too. Offences punishable with between one and three years have a limitation period, and the BNSS sets it out in Section 514. For criminal defamation, that window is short. If you have been sitting on this for two years, say so at the first meeting — it changes what is realistically available.
The platform route: faster than court, and free
Every significant social media platform operating in India is required under the IT Rules, 2021 to appoint a grievance officer, acknowledge a complaint within 24 hours, and dispose of it within 15 days. The email address is usually buried in the help section. Write to it from an address you control, describe the content precisely, attach screenshots with URLs visible, and keep the auto-reply.
If the officer does not respond or the response is useless, the IT Rules provide for an appeal to the Grievance Appellate Committee within 30 days of the platform's decision. That is a government body, not a court, and it does not charge a fee.
Keep a copy of every email you send and every reply you get, in one folder. A platform's silence for three weeks is itself evidence you will want later.
Ask for two things, not one
Takedown and identification are separate requests, and people confuse them. Removing a post is something the platform can do on its own. Handing over the IP log, the registration email address or the phone number behind an account is something no platform does for a private individual, because its own terms and Indian privacy practice push the other way. That information moves on a police requisition or a court order. It is the single strongest practical argument for still trying to get an FIR registered, even if you have started the other routes.
Civil court: injunction, damages, and the one-year clock
A civil suit does not put anyone in jail. What it can do is stop the publication and, in some cases, pay for the harm. If the content is defamatory, an injunction restraining further publication and a claim for damages both lie. If it is an intimate image circulated without consent, the claim is framed around privacy and confidence. Where the account is anonymous, courts in India have in practice granted injunctions against persons unknown, usually described by their handle, on the plaintiff showing that ordinary efforts to identify them have failed. The platform is then put on notice and will act far faster on a court order than on a grievance ticket.
Two hard limits. Defamation carries a one-year limitation running from publication — after that the civil claim is gone whether or not the post is still up. And litigation costs money and takes months, sometimes years, before a final decree. An interim injunction can come in weeks; the suit itself will not.
Preserve the evidence before you do anything else
This is the step people skip, and it is the one that cannot be redone.
- Take screenshots with the URL bar, the account handle and the visible date in the frame.
- Export the chat or the conversation thread as a file if the app allows it. Keep the original, not a re-photographed version.
- Do not delete the messages, do not clear the app data, and do not factory reset the phone.
- Note down dates and times of each incident in a plain table as they happen. A contemporaneous note carries more weight than a summary written six months later.
- If you want to rely on an electronic record in court, Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 governs its admissibility and requires a certificate in the prescribed form. This replaced the old Section 65B route. Get help with the certificate rather than guessing at it.
Blocking an account is fine — do it after you have saved what you need.
What is not available, so you do not waste money chasing it
- No general right to be forgotten. India has no statute that lets a person demand erasure of lawful content. Some High Courts have recognised a limited privacy-based right to erasure in specific facts, but the position is not uniform and it turns heavily on what the content is.
- No Section 66A. It was struck down and does not exist.
- No automatic compensation from a criminal case. State victim compensation schemes exist and a sentencing court can direct payment, but it is discretionary and slow.
- No power to make the police arrest someone. A magistrate can direct an investigation. Nobody can direct an arrest.
- Blocking a website at the source is a government function under the IT Act, exercised through a blocking order. Individuals do not apply for it directly.
How long each route actually takes
- Platform grievance officer: acknowledgment in 24 hours, resolution within 15 days, appeal to the Grievance Appellate Committee within 30 days of the decision.
- Written escalation to the Superintendent of Police: expect weeks, and sometimes no reply at all.
- Application to the magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS: a few weeks to a few months, depending on the court's board.
- Civil suit with an interim injunction application: an interim order can come in weeks; the suit runs much longer.
Do you have to know who is behind the account?
No. A complaint or an FIR can be against unknown persons, described by the handle and the platform. Identifying them is part of what an investigation is for. What the complaint must do is describe the content, say when it appeared, and set out what it has caused you. Vague complaints — "someone is harassing me online" — give a police officer nothing to write down and nothing to investigate.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I file the complaint in the city where I live, not where the accused lives?
Usually yes. Information about a cognizable offence can be given at any police station under Section 173 of the BNSS, and if that station lacks jurisdiction the information is transferred to the correct one. In practice, cyber offences are commonly reported where the complainant resides or where the device was used. Expect some argument at the counter if the station is looking for a reason to redirect you.
The police told me this is a civil matter. Is that correct?
Sometimes. A dispute between two people who know each other, with a matrimonial case already running, is often genuinely civil and the police will see it that way. But criminal intimidation, stalking, identity theft and the publication of obscene material are criminal offences regardless of who the other person is. If the officer's view is wrong, the written escalation and the magistrate route are how you challenge it. If it is right, a civil suit is the honest answer and I will say so.
Can I get the post permanently deleted from the internet?
You can get it removed from the platform that hosts it, and you can get a court order that binds that platform. You cannot guarantee that nobody has copied it elsewhere. Caches, reposts and archive sites are a real problem and no order reaches all of them at once.
Will the person find out my address or phone number?
In a criminal case, the accused or their advocate will ordinarily learn the identity of the complainant. That is unavoidable once a chargesheet is filed. Where there is a genuine safety concern, a court can be asked to keep an address out of the copies served, and protection orders can be sought. Raise it early, not at the hearing.
Is there a fee to complain to a platform or to the Grievance Appellate Committee?
No. Both are free. The cost in these routes is your time, not money.
If you want to take this forward
Send me three things and I can tell you within a short call whether anything is worth doing. First, the complaint you gave the police and its date, plus the receipt or acknowledgment if you got one. Second, screenshots with the URLs visible, in a single PDF or folder. Third, a two-line note in your own words on what has happened and when you first complained. Use /contact-us or /book to fix a time.
If the limitation has run, or if this is a private quarrel already before a family court, I will tell you that there may be nothing to argue and you should not spend money on it. That is a useful answer too.
Chamber: Lawyers' Chamber, Chamber No. 86, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi - 110001. Phone +91 97295 06771. Email me@sudhirrao.com. The chamber's practice covers criminal defence, cyber crime and economic offences. Adv. Jyoti Rao (Bar Council of Delhi D/891/2023) handles family and matrimonial matters and is available where the online conduct sits inside a matrimonial dispute.
This article is general information about Indian law as it stands, not legal advice on your own situation, and reading it does not create an advocate-client relationship.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India
Facing a similar matter? Speak to a criminal lawyer in Delhi — Advocate Sudhir Rao appears in bail, trial and appellate matters before the Delhi District Courts, the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India.