Shivaji Rathore 01-01-2026
In a significant reaffirmation of procedural safeguards under criminal law, the Supreme Court has categorically held that notices for appearance issued to an accused or suspect under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) cannot be served through WhatsApp, e-mail, SMS, or any other electronic mode. The Court clarified that electronic service is neither a recognised substitute nor an alternative to the modes of service expressly prescribed under the CrPC/BNSS. The directions were issued by a Bench comprising Justice M. M. Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal in the continuing proceedings in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, a landmark matter aimed at preventing unnecessary arrests and streamlining the grant of bail to deserving undertrial prisoners. The Court has been monitoring compliance by States and High Courts with its earlier directions in the case.
No WhatsApp Service for Statutory Notices
The Court made it unequivocally clear that: Service of notices through WhatsApp or other electronic modes is not contemplated by law for Section 41A CrPC/Section 35 BNSS. Police authorities must strictly adhere to the modes of service prescribed under Chapter VI of the CrPC, 1973 and the corresponding provisions of the BNSS, 2023. The ruling also extends to other statutory notices. The Court directed that notices under: Section 160 CrPC / Section 179 BNSS (attendance of witnesses), and Section 175 CrPC / Section 195 BNSS (power to summon documents and persons), must also be served only through the statutorily prescribed modes, and not electronically.
Submissions by Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing as amicus curiae, highlighted a concerning practice where police authorities were serving Section 41A notices via WhatsApp. He specifically referred to a Standing Order dated 26.01.2024 issued by the DGP, Haryana, which permitted service of such notices through electronic means. Drawing the Court’s attention to earlier binding precedent, the amicus pointed out that in 2022, the Supreme Court had upheld the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Rakesh Kumar v. Vijayanta Arya (DCP), which categorically held that WhatsApp or electronic service is not a valid mode under Section 41A CrPC, as it is inconsistent with Chapter VI of the Code. The Court had also approved the reasoning in Amandeep Singh Johar v. State (NCT of Delhi).
It was further submitted that although the BNSS, 2023 facilitates the use of electronic means for conducting trials and inquiries, it does not authorise electronic service of notices under Section 35 BNSS.
Binding Directions Issued by the Supreme Court
In this backdrop, the Supreme Court issued the following mandatory directions:
(a) All States and Union Territories shall issue Standing Orders directing their police machinery to serve notices under Section 41A CrPC / Section 35 BNSS only through the modes prescribed by law. Service through WhatsApp or electronic means shall not be treated as a valid or substitute mode.
(b) While issuing such Standing Orders, States/UTs must strictly adhere to the guidelines laid down by the Delhi High Court in Rakesh Kumar and Amandeep Singh Johar, both of which stand affirmed by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil.
(c) States/UTs shall issue additional Standing Orders ensuring that notices under Section 160 CrPC / Section 179 BNSS and Section 175 CrPC / Section 195 BNSS are also served only through the statutorily recognised modes.
Case: Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI
