Recently, the Rajasthan High Court addressed the procedural validity of serving summons to a serving member of the Armed Forces through WhatsApp, holding that such service falls short of statutory requirements. The Bench, led by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, quashed an ex-parte maintenance order issued against a sepoy and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, highlighting the necessity of strict adherence to legislated service procedures.
The petitioner, a sepoy in the Indian Army, faced an ex-parte maintenance order directing him to pay Rs. 12,000 per month to his wife under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Family Court issued a summons on three occasions, which went unserved. Subsequently, a WhatsApp message was sent to the petitioner, which was treated as sufficient service, and the ex parte proceedings were initiated. The petitioner challenged the order before the High Court, contending that proper statutory procedure had not been followed.
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand noted the procedural provisions under Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018, and Order V Rule 28 CPC, which mandate that summons to a soldier, sailor, or airman must be served through their Commanding Officer and sufficient time must be provided to enable the person to be relieved from operational duties.
The Court observed, “The Army, the Air Force and the Navy is collectively known as the Armed Forces which are highly organized and disciplined forces and are specially designed for carrying out battles, protecting the State from the threat of external forces and to conduct other special operations…Special procedures/processes have been made by the Legislature for service of summons upon the members of the Armed Forces…when a case is filed against them in their personal capacity.”
The Court noted that the petitioner was posted in operational duties in a treacherous high-altitude area at the relevant time, making personal appearance impossible. Consequently, the Court stated, “Hence, under such circumstances, the service of summons upon the petitioner on his WhatsApp mobile number cannot be treated as sufficient in view of the mandate contained under Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018 and under Order V Rule 28 CPC.”
Further, the Court emphasised that failure to follow the mandated procedure deprived the petitioner of a reasonable opportunity to appear, resulting in a gross violation of natural justice principles.
Lastly, in light of these observations, the Court quashed the ex-parte maintenance order and remitted the matter to the Family Court for fresh adjudication. Justice Dhand directed that the Family Court afford the petitioner and respondent a fair hearing, preferably within four months from receipt of the certified copy of the Court’s order.
The Court further directed the Registrar General to circulate a copy of the order to all judicial officers, including those in Family Courts across Rajasthan, to ensure compliance with statutory service requirements for Armed Forces personnel.
Case Title: Deevan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr.
Case No: S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 104/2025
Coram: Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand
Advocate for Petitioner: Advs. Rajendra Rathore, Ajay Poonia, Lokesh Dholpuria
Advocate for Respondent: AGA Amit Punia, Adv. Dhura Ram
Read Order @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
