Party Not Required To Appear Before Police If Summons U/S 35 BNSS Does Not Contain Crime Number, Details Of Offence Alleged: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court has said that in the event a notice issued by the police summoning a citizen under Section 35 of the BNSS does not contain the crime number, the offence alleged or the appending of the FIR, subject to just exceptions, the noticee is not obliged to appear before the officer who has directed him to appear and no coercive action can be taken against him.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “Summoning to the Police Station is not summoning a person to a happy place. A citizen must know as to why he is being summoned.”

The Court also directed the state government to issue guidelines drawing up a checklist, to be followed by all Police Station House Officers, akin to what other states have done.

The court said till the same is issued, the notice under Section 35 of the BNSS shall mention the crime number and the offence alleged in the crime number and can be communicated to the noticee either through conventional methods or through electronic mode.

Further, it was stated that the communication shall attach a copy of the FIR so registered, as the FIR would contain the gist of the complaint.

The Court referred to Section 35(4) which permits the issuance of a notice to any person, making it mandatory for them to comply with the terms of the notice

Section 35(6) commands that if a person fails to comply with the terms of the notice or is unwilling to identify himself, the Police Officer may, subject to such Court orders, arrest him for the offence mentioned in the notice.

The court said “The rigour is a little stronger. Stronger the rigour, the noticee is required to know all that he has to reply, prior to his appearance before the Police.”

It added that the police department is also directed to bring about a robust system to ensure that FIRs are uploaded immediately on their registration and make it search-friendly.

The court issued the directions while considering the petition filed by a senior Journalist Tavaragi Rajashekhar Shiva Prasad who had questioned the notice issued under Section 41-A through WhatsApp by the Amruthalli police station, on June 6, summoning him to appear the next day without mentioning the FIR number.

During the hearing the police submitted to the court that the first notice dated June 6 was inadvertently issued without the case number and after the petition was filed, another notice was issued on June 10, containing the necessary details.

Following this the court allowed the petition in part, quashed the notice issued on June 6 and sustained the notice issued on June 10. However, it directed that it should be executed bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order.

Appearance: Senior Advocate M Aruna Shyam a/w Advocate Suyog Herele E for Petitioner

HCGP Harish Ganapathi

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 344

Case Title: Tavaragi Rajashekhar Shiva Prasad AND State of Karnataka Case No: WRIT PETITION No.15125 OF 2024