Bombay High Court: In an application dealing with whether service or communication of summons via electronic mode is legally acceptable under the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), a Single Judge Bench of Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J., held that summons served electronically is legally valid in view of Sections 70 and 530 BNSS. The Court set aside the order directing recovery of costs from the Constable who had served summon on witnesses through mobile phone and observed that the Special Judge (Trial Court) had ignored the amended provisions.
A case was posted for recording prosecution evidence as the matter was part-heard. The summons report disclosed that summons was served through mobile phone to the witnesses. The witnesses were absent and the Trial Court observed that the service of summons through mobile phone to the witnesses was not allowed and noting the delay due to non-service of summons by legal mode, imposed cost on the Constable concerned.
The Public Prosecutor submitted that the Trial Court passed the order by ignoring Sections 70 and 530 BNSS. It was submitted that initially the summons was served on the witnesses and the date communicated to them was 3 November 2025. Thereafter, the summons was again reissued on 3 November 2025, which was never handed over to the Constable concerned to serve. The diary maintained by the Constable regarding receipt of summons from the Court was also placed before the Court.
The Court opined that there was no need to serve the notice on the non-applicant and noted that the cost was imposed solely because the summons was served through mobile phone. The Court highlighted that there is an amended provision in view of Section 70 BNSS, which deals with proof of service in cases where the serving officer is not present. Section 70(3) BNSS states that all summons served through electronic communication under Sections 64 to 71 BNSS shall be considered as duly served and a copy of such electronic summons shall be attested and kept as a proof of service of summons.
The Court further observed that Section 530 BNSS provides that trials and proceedings may be held in electronic mode, including issuance, service and execution of summons and warrants, examination of complainant and witness, recording of evidence, all appellate proceedings or any other proceedings, by use of electronic communication or audio-video electronic means.
The Court referred to Kross Television India (P) Ltd. v. Vikhyat Chitra Production, 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 1433, wherein it was held that the purpose of service is to put the other party to notice and to give a copy of the papers, with the mode being irrelevant. The Court reasoned that the communication was already there as initially the summons had been served and the witnesses were bond over. Therefore, the subsequent communication through mobile phone by the Constable regarding the date was not illegal, because service by electronic media is now accepted in view of Section 70 BNSS.
The Court observed that even on facts, the Trial Court’s order was incorrect, as after 3 November 2025, when the witnesses were bond over, the summons was reissued, but they were not handed over to the Constable for service. Accordingly, the Court, while allowing the application, quashed and set aside the order directing recovery of costs from the Constable concerned.
[State of Maharashtra v. Satish, Criminal Application (Apl) No. 222 of 2026, decided on 12-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Applicant: D. V. Chauhan, Public Prosecutor a/b A. M. Kadukar, APP.