Guwahati | The opening day of the Budget Session of the 16th Assam Legislative Assembly witnessed a sharp confrontation between opposition legislator Akhil Gogoi and Assam Cabinet Minister Pijush Hazarika over the registration of First Information Reports (FIRs) by the state police.

The issue surfaced during Question Hour when Gogoi raised concerns regarding the alleged non-registration of FIRs despite complaints being filed at police stations across Assam. The question had originally been addressed to Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, who also holds the Home portfolio, but was answered by Hazarika in the Chief Minister’s absence as Sarma is currently in New Delhi on official engagements.

Gogoi alleged that the government was underreporting crime by limiting the number of complaints converted into FIRs, thereby affecting official crime statistics.

“The government is ensuring that fewer cases are reflected in official records and National Crime Records Bureau data,” Gogoi argued while seeking detailed information on police complaints lodged across the state between July 2024 and June 2026.

The Raijor Dal MLA had sought data on General Diary (GD) entries, preliminary inquiries conducted by police, the number of complaints converted into FIRs, cases involving medical examinations, and the annual gap between GD entries and FIR registrations.

The debate escalated after Gogoi accused the government of avoiding direct answers to his queries, drawing strong objections from members of the treasury benches.

Responding sharply, Hazarika turned the focus on Gogoi himself, claiming that official records showed 32 criminal cases registered against the opposition legislator in various police stations across Assam.

The minister further alleged discrepancies in Gogoi’s election affidavit, claiming that only 21 cases had been disclosed despite government records indicating a higher number.

“According to government data, there are 32 cases against Akhil Gogoi. However, only 21 cases were mentioned in his election affidavit. If incorrect information has been furnished, the matter will be examined legally,” Hazarika told the House.

As tensions rose, Assembly Speaker Ranjeet Kumar Dass intervened and directed that Gogoi’s remarks suggesting the Chief Minister was deliberately avoiding questions be expunged from the official proceedings.

The Speaker observed that the Chief Minister’s absence should not be construed as an attempt to evade accountability, noting that ministers are often required to attend parliamentary and official engagements outside the state.

Clarifying the government’s position on FIR registration, Hazarika cited provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which permit police officers to conduct preliminary scrutiny of complaints that may be non-cognisable or appear malicious in nature.

He explained that in such cases, approval from a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) is required before a preliminary inquiry can be initiated. The inquiry, he said, must be completed within 14 days, after which an FIR is registered if a cognisable offence is established.

The minister also highlighted the distinction between General Diary entries and FIRs, noting that while every complaint is recorded in the GD within 24 hours, not all entries automatically result in criminal cases being registered.

Hazarika further stated that complainants dissatisfied with police action have the option of approaching the Superintendent of Police or seeking judicial intervention through the courts.

The exchange set a combative tone for the Budget Session, signalling that issues related to governance, law enforcement, and accountability are likely to dominate debates in the Assembly in the days ahead. With the state budget scheduled to be presented later this week, the proceedings are expected to witness further confrontations between the ruling alliance and the opposition over a range of policy and administrative issues.