POCSO Act: Prosecution Can Cross Examine The Victim On Her Turning Hostile: Karnataka HC
Background
In civil and criminal cases, courts can issue summons to parties or witnesses to appear before them.
Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, Section 113 & 114 of CPC, and CrPC provisions govern the service of summons.
Courts often send summons by Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due (AD) to ensure the party receives it.
Key issue in this case:
Whether a court can directly serve summons by registered post (AD) to a defendant who resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court, without following additional safeguards.
Punjab & Haryana High Court’s Decision
The Court held that summons sent by registered post AD cannot be treated as automatically served if the defendant resides outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Key points from the judgment:
Jurisdiction Matters
Courts have limited territorial jurisdiction.
Direct service of summons outside jurisdiction is not equivalent to personal service.
Registered Post AD is Not Absolute Proof of Service
Just because the AD is returned “delivered” does not guarantee the defendant actually received or acknowledged it personally.
There could be cases of misdelivery, refusal, or fraud.
Requirement of Due Diligence
Courts must ensure that service follows procedural safeguards, such as:
Service through local court officers in the area where the defendant resides.
Publication or alternative methods if personal service is not possible.
Simply posting by registered AD from outside is insufficient.
Protecting Defendant’s Rights
Right to notice and opportunity to be heard is a fundamental principle of natural justice.
Improper service may invalidate subsequent proceedings against the defendant.
Relevant Case Laws
Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh (1975)
Service of summons must ensure the party has actual knowledge; mere procedural formality is not enough.
Vijay Singh v. State of Punjab (2000)
Courts outside the territorial jurisdiction cannot assume service is complete without verifying delivery.
Harbans Lal v. State of Punjab (1995)
Summons by post needs additional steps if the defendant is outside the jurisdiction, such as sending through local court officials.
Amar Singh v. Union of India (2008)
Courts must follow due process to avoid violating the principle of natural justice.
Supreme Court / High Court Principles Applied
Natural Justice: Every defendant must have actual notice.
Territorial Jurisdiction: Court cannot enforce procedural shortcuts outside its jurisdiction.
Due Diligence in Service: Registered post AD is evidence of attempt, not proof of service.
Conclusion
Registered post AD cannot replace personal service when the defendant resides outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Courts must ensure proper service through local authorities or alternative means.
Failure to follow these safeguards can invalidate subsequent proceedings, protecting the defendant’s rights.
✅ In short: Courts cannot rely solely on registered post AD to serve summons to a defendant outside their territorial jurisdiction. Proper service through local authorities or other safeguards is mandatory to ensure fair notice and uphold natural justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments