Police can't serve accused notice via WhatsApp, or other electronic means: Supreme Court

Why in the News?

Recently, a bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal held that police officers are not authorized to issue notices through WhatsApp or other electronic means for the appearance of accused/suspects. The Supreme Court ruled on this matter in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2025).

Background of Satender Kumar Antil Versus CBI (2025) : 

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, serving as Amicus Curiae (friend of the court), filed a compliance report on January 20, 2025. The case monitors the implementation of previous court directives and involves participation from all Indian states, Union Territories, and High Courts. 

Supreme Court Rules: Police Notices via WhatsApp Are Invalid – Only Physical Notices Hold Legal Authority.

The case primarily deals with three main issues: 

• Release of Undertrial Prisoners (UTPs):  The release of Undertrial Prisoners (UTPs) on personal bond using AADHAAR card verification.

• Proper Service of Notices: Ensuring legal procedures under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, and Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 are followed.

• Institutional Monitoring Mechanism: High Courts to oversee compliance with legal mandates. 

The case references the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI & Anr. and Delhi High Court judgments in Rakesh Kumar v. Vijayanta Arya (2021) and Amandeep Singh Johar v. State (2018).

Court’s Observations: Police Notice via WhatsApp and Compliance Issues

Compliance Status: 

• Most states and Union Territories have complied with the Supreme Court's directives.

Non-Compliance:

• Mizoram filed its compliance affidavit after the prescribed deadline.

• Lakshadweep resubmitted an earlier compliance affidavit from May 21, 2023, instead of a new one.

Service of Notices via WhatsApp:

• The Supreme Court reaffirmed that a police notice via WhatsApp is not legally valid. Notices under Section 41-A of CrPC and Section 35 of BNSS must follow proper procedures to ensure compliance.

• The Court objected to a January 26, 2024, Standing Order from Haryana's DGP that allowed the electronic service of notices via WhatsApp.

Institutional Monitoring:

• High Courts must hold monthly meetings to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s directives.

• Authorities must submit monthly compliance reports.

• NALSA supported the recommendation to release undertrial prisoners (UTPs) on personal bonds after Aadhaar verification.

Supreme Court Directives : 

Service of Notices:

• All states and Union Territories must instruct their police forces to issue notices strictly according to legal provisions under the CrPC, 1973, and BNSS, 2023.

• Electronic services, like WhatsApp, are not substitutes for legally recognized modes of notice service.

Proper Implementation of Notice Issuance:

• Police must not use electronic methods for serving notices under:

  • Section 41-A of CrPC / Section 35 of BNSS (accused persons not immediately arrested)

  • Section 160 of CrPC / Section 179 of BNSS (witness summons)

  • Section 175 of CrPC / Section 195 of BNSS (document submission requests)

High Court Monitoring:

• High Court Committees must meet monthly to review compliance with the Supreme Court's directives.

• Monthly compliance reports must be submitted to the High Courts.

• The Registrar Generals of High Courts and Chief Secretaries of all states/UTs must ensure compliance within three weeks.

Legal Provisions Considered : 

• Section 41-A, CrPC / Section 35, BNSS: Governs the issuance of notices for accused persons who do not need immediate arrest.

• Section 532, BNSS: Allows for electronic proceedings, but prohibits service of notices via WhatsApp or other digital means.

Landmark Judgments : 

1. Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI & Anr. (2022):

   • Established guidelines on arrest procedures and the legal service of notices.

   • Emphasized that notices under Section 41-A of the CrPC must follow prescribed procedures.

     
     

2. Rakesh Kumar v. Vijayanta Arya (2021):

   • Delhi High Court ruled against the validity of notices served via WhatsApp under Section 41-A of CrPC.

   • Supported by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (2022).

Conclusion :

• The Supreme Court has firmly reiterated that notices must be served through legally prescribed methods under the CrPC and BNSS. Electronic means, like WhatsApp, are not valid for service.

• High Courts must ensure compliance through regular monitoring and reporting.

• The matter will be reviewed again by the Supreme Court on March 18, 2025.

Empower Your Legal Practice with AI

Are you a legal professional? Stay ahead with our innovative Lawttorney.AI tool. Streamline your legal processes, enhance productivity, and gain a competitive edge. Experience the future of legal technology—try our free Webinar session today!