Case Title: Rajendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (Application u/s 482 CrPC No. 45953 of 2023
In a significant ruling harmonising criminal law with digital communication, the Allahabad High Court in Rajendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (2023) has held that a statutory demand notice sent through electronic modes such as email or WhatsApp, if it satisfies the requirements of Section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, would also constitute a valid notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court further clarified that such notice shall be deemed to have been served on the date of dispatch itself.
Background of the Case
The applicant approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, inter alia, contending that the statutory notice was not validly served, as it was sent through electronic means rather than conventional postal modes. Rejecting this contention, the Court examined the interplay between the Negotiable Instruments Act and the Information Technology Act, particularly in the context of modern methods of communication. Statutory Requirement under Section 138 N.I. Act Section 138 mandates that the payee or holder in due course must issue a written demand notice to the drawer of the cheque within the stipulated period after dishonour. The provision, however, does not prescribe any specific mode of service.
What is essential is:
Issuance of a written demand,
Within the statutory time frame,
Communicated to the drawer.
Role of Section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000
Section 13 of the I.T. Act governs the time and place of dispatch and receipt of electronic records. The Court noted that: An electronic record is deemed to be dispatched when it enters a computer resource beyond the control of the sender. It is deemed to be received when it enters the designated computer resource of the addressee. Applying this provision, the Court held that once a notice is sent to the correct email address or WhatsApp number of the drawer, the requirement of dispatch stands fulfilled. Electronic Notice as a “Written Notice”
The Court reiterated that electronic communications are legally recognised as written communication. Emails and WhatsApp messages fall within the definition of “electronic record” and therefore meet the statutory requirement of a written notice under Section 138 N.I. Act. If the contents of the notice clearly demand payment of the cheque amount and the notice is capable of being retrieved and proved, the mode of transmission becomes immaterial.
Deemed Service on the Date of Dispatch A crucial legal principle laid down in Rajendra v. State of U.P. is that service of electronic notice is complete on the date of dispatch itself. The drawer cannot evade criminal liability by: Avoiding opening the message,
Remaining silent, or Simply denying receipt.
Once dispatch to the correct electronic address is established, deemed service follows as a matter of law. Judicial Emphasis: Law Must Keep Pace with Technology The Court adopted a purposive interpretation, holding that the object of Section 138 is to ensure credibility of commercial transactions. In an era where communication predominantly takes place through electronic means, restricting statutory notices to physical modes would defeat the legislative intent. The ruling reinforces the principle that procedural technicalities cannot be used as shields to defeat substantive justice.
Practical Takeaways
Demand notices under Section 138 N.I. Act can validly be sent via email or WhatsApp. Proof such as screenshots, delivery reports, timestamps, and electronic logs assumes evidentiary value.
Drawers cannot avoid prosecution by disputing receipt once dispatch is proved.
Conclusion
The decision in Rajendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (2023) firmly settles the legal position that a notice sent through email or WhatsApp, in compliance with Section 13 of the Information Technology Act, is a valid statutory notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and shall be deemed to be served on the date of dispatch itself. This ruling is a clear affirmation that cheque dishonour law has evolved with technology, ensuring that legal accountability cannot be diluted in the digital age.
