Police Cannot Issue Notice Of Appearance To Accused Via WhatsApp: Karnataka High Court

Post By 24law
February 28, 2025

Pranav B Prem

In a significant ruling the Karnataka High Court held that a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) or Section 41(A) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) must be served through prescribed legal channels and not via electronic messaging apps.

Karnataka HC Quashes WhatsApp Notice

Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar, while hearing a petition filed by Pavankumar, a resident of Tamil Nadu, quashed the notice served to him by the Karnataka Police through WhatsApp. The notice directed him to appear in connection with Crime No.193/2024, registered under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Court ruled: “The notice dated 14.02.2025 issued by respondent No.1 Police to the petitioner under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in respect of the case in Crime No.193/2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, pending on the file of 39th Addl. CMM (CJM) Court, Bengaluru City, is hereby quashed.”

Legal Position on Issuance of Notice via WhatsApp

The Court referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., Misc. Application No. 2034/2022, which categorically held that notices under Section 35(3) BNSS / 41(A) Cr.PC cannot be served through WhatsApp or other electronic modes. The High Court reiterated: “A perusal of the impugned notice dated 14.02.2025 will indicate that the same has been issued through WhatsApp, which is clearly impermissible in law in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) and the same deserves to be quashed.”

Liberty Granted to Issue Fresh Notice

While quashing the WhatsApp notice, the Court granted liberty to the police to issue a fresh notice in accordance with the law. The order stated: “However, liberty is reserved in favour of respondent to issue fresh notice under Section 35(3) BNSS [41(A) of Cr.P.C] to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law.”

Background of the Case

The case originated when Pavankumar was served a notice via WhatsApp directing him to appear before the police in relation to a cybercrime case. Challenging the notice, he contended that service through WhatsApp was not legally valid. The Court examined the material on record and found that the notice was indeed served via WhatsApp, which led to its quashing.

Supreme Court’s Stand on Electronic Service of Notices

The High Court heavily relied on the Supreme Court’s directions in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, where it was explicitly stated: “Service of notice under Section 41-A of CrPC, 1973 / Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 is to be made in person, as contemplated under the statutes, and not through WhatsApp or other electronic modes.” Furthermore, the Court noted that even under Section 532 of BNSS, 2023, which allows certain judicial proceedings to be conducted via electronic means, the service of a notice under Section 35 BNSS is not permitted through WhatsApp.