Source: Allahabad High Court 

Why in News? 

Recently the Allahabad High Court in the case of M/S Parthas Textiles and Another v. State of U.P. and Another highlighted change brought by Section 65 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which expands the methods for serving summons to companies.  

What was the Background of M/S Parthas Textiles and Another v. State of U.P. and Another? 

• M/S Parthas Textiles and a partner of the company filed a petition challenging proceedings initiated against them under the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 
• The case involves a cheque issued on behalf of M/s Partha Textiles that bounced.  
• A complaint was filed against the firm, but summons was issued to a partner personally instead of to the firm. 
• The key issue is whether, when a cheque is issued by a registered firm and bounces, summons should be issued to the firm or to its partner in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The court noted that as per the complaint, only the firm M/S Partha Textiles was arraigned as accused through its partner, and the demand notice after the cheque bounced was also sent to the firm. 
• The court observed that on bouncing of a cheque issued on behalf of a registered firm, the primary liability is of the firm, and its partner can be vicariously liable, but in the present case, the partner was not implicated as an accused along with the firm. 
• The court held that under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 or Section 190(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court takes cognizance against an offence, not the offender. However, summons are issued against the offender to inform them about the charges to which they must reply. 
• The court, upon conjoint reading of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Section 63 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and Section 305 of the Criminal Procedure Code, concluded that whenever a company is accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, summons must be issued in the name of the company and service can be effected by serving it on the Principal Officer or Local Manager of the Company. 
• The court cited precedents, including the Supreme Court's judgment in Iridium India Telecom v. Motorola Incorporated and others (2011), which established that a corporation can be held criminally liable. 
• The court noted that Section 63 of the CrPC permits the issuance of summons to a company through its Principal Officer, and after receiving summons, it is for the company to appoint any representative to appear on its behalf. 
• The court observed that the corresponding provision to Section 63 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the new Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is Section 65, which also prescribes that summons of a company or corporation may be served through the Director apart from the Manager, Secretary and other Officers of the company. 
• The court held that if a company is arraigned as accused in a complaint, summons ought to be issued to the company through its Principal Officer or Local Manager as mentioned in Section 63 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 
• The court noted that service of summons upon the company can be made as per the mode provided under Section 144 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which allows for service by speed post or courier service approved by the Court. 
• The court concluded that in the present case, though the Firm (M/S Partha Textiles) was arraigned as an accused, summons was improperly issued to its partner personally, which does not constitute proper service for the firm. 
• The court found that in this case, although the firm was named as the accused, summons was improperly issued to the partner personally. 
• The court quashed the summoning order and non-bailable warrant issued against the partner (applicant no. 2). 
• The court directed the lower court to issue a fresh summoning order in accordance with the proper procedure within one month. 
• The court noted that although new laws (Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) have come into effect, this pending case should proceed under the old Criminal Procedure Code provisions. 

Service of Summons Under CrPC  

• About : 
  • Section 63 of CrPC deals with service of summons on corporate bodies and societies. 
  • Service of summons on a corporation may be effected by serving it on the secretary, local manager or other principal officer of the corporation. 
  • Alternatively, service may be effected by letter sent by registered post, addressed to the chief officer of the corporation in India. 
  • When sent by registered post, service shall be deemed to have been effected when the letter would arrive in ordinary course of post. 
  • The term "corporation" in this section means an incorporated company or other body corporate. 

Service of Summons Under BNSS  

• About 
  • A summons is a legal document issued by a court ordering a person to appear before it. Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), summons are typically issued to the accused or witnesses to ensure their presence in court proceedings.  
    • Section 63 to 71 of BNSS laid down the provision regarding summons.  
    • In Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) the provision regarding summons was laid down under Sections 61 to 69.   
    • The main objective of issuing a summons is to notify individuals about the legal action and to provide them an opportunity to present their case or testimony. 
• Section 65 
  • Section 65 deals with Service of summons on corporate bodies, firms, and societies. 
  • Service of summons on a company or corporation may be effected by serving it on the Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer of the company or corporation. 
  • Alternatively, service may be effected by letter sent by registered post addressed to the Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer of the company or corporation in India. 
  • When sent by registered post, service shall be deemed to have been effected when the letter would arrive in ordinary course of post. 
  • "Company" means a body corporate for the purposes of this section. 
  • Service of summons on a firm or other association of individuals may be effected by serving it on any partner of such firm or association. 
  • For firms or associations, service may also be effected by letter sent by registered post addressed to such partner. 
  • When sent by registered post to a partner, service shall be deemed to have been effected when the letter would arrive in ordinary course of post. 

Differences between Section 65 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 63 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 

• Scope of entities covered:  
  • BNSS: Explicitly includes companies, corporations, firms, and other associations of individuals. 
  • CrPC: Covers corporations, which includes incorporated companies and registered societies. 
• Officers for service:  
  • BNSS: Specifies Director, Manager, Secretary, or other officer. 
  • CrPC: Mentions secretary, local manager, or other principal officer. 
• Addressee for registered post:  
  • BNSS: Can be addressed to Director, Manager, Secretary, or other officer. 
  • CrPC: Addressed to the chief officer of the corporation in India. 
• Provision for firms and associations:  
  • BNSS: Includes specific provision for serving summons on firms and associations through partners. 
  • CrPC: Does not explicitly mention firms or associations.