Chapter VI
Section 64 CrPC: Service when persons summoned cannot be found
New Law Update (2024)
Section 68 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Warrant / Summons Process
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
Where the person summoned cannot, by the exercise of due diligence, be found, the summons may be served by leaving one of the duplicates for him with some adult male member of his family residing with him, and the person with whom the summons is so left shall, if so required by the serving officer, sign a receipt therefor on the back of the other duplicate.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Landmark Judgements
P.L. Bhargava v. State of M.P., 1987 CriLJ 1604 (MP High Court):
This judgment emphasized that for substituted service under Section 64 CrPC to be valid, two conditions must be strictly met: (1) the person summoned cannot be found even after exercising due diligence, and (2) the summons must be left with an adult male member of the family residing with the summoned person. The Court highlighted that mere difficulty in finding the person is not sufficient; proper efforts must be shown.
M.S.P.L. Ltd. v. The State of Goa, 2019 (2) Goa.L.R. 76 (Bombay High Court, Goa Bench):
While not exclusively on Section 64, this judgment elucidated the concept of “due diligence” in the context of serving processes, stating that it entails making all reasonable efforts expected of a diligent officer to effect personal service. It underscores that substituted service is an exception and must only be resorted to after exhausting all primary methods of service.