Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
References:["Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - Supreme Court"]["M/s Streamerzone vs State of Telangana - Telangana"]["Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227"]["Banoth Gangaram vs The state of Telangana - Telangana"]["The State of Telangana vs Mohammed Bin Ahmed Bawazir - Telangana"]["Gummadi Gopal Reddy vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]["Shaik Fathimunissa Begum vs The state of Telangana - Telangana"]["Dendi Srilatha vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]["Bokka Muralidhar Reddy vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]
In the realm of criminal investigations in India, balancing the need for effective policing with individual rights is crucial. A common query arises: If an investigating agency suspects someone of a cognizable offence but doesn't deem arrest necessary, must they serve a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023? And if the person complies, can arrest still happen? This question, often phrased as 7 ??? ?? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ????????? ???? ????, ????? ?????; ??? ?????? ??? ???? 35(3) BNSS ?? ??? ????? ????????: ??????? ????, highlights procedural safeguards post the replacement of the CrPC.
This blog post breaks down Section 35(3) BNSS, its mandatory nature, compliance implications, and insights from judicial precedents. Note: This is general information based on legal provisions and cases; consult a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) modernizes criminal procedure, with Section 35 addressing arrests without warrants for cognizable offences. Subsection (3) is pivotal: Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 mandates that when an Investigating Agency, based on a reasonable complaint, credible information, or suspicion, determines that a person may have committed a cognizable offence but does not deem arrest necessary, it must serve a written notice requiring the person to appear before the agency or at another specified place. Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227
This provision mirrors Section 41A of the CrPC, 1973, promoting notices over immediate arrests to protect liberty under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution. The notice directs appearance at a specified time and place, fostering cooperation without custody.
Yes, generally, it is mandatory. The law states the agency must serve a written notice when arrest isn't required. Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227 Courts reinforce this:
Failure to issue notice where arrest isn't needed may render actions vulnerable to challenge, aligning with Supreme Court guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI for minimizing arbitrary arrests.
Once served, the recipient must comply by appearing as directed and cooperating. Continued compliance typically prevents arrest unless:
The recipient of the notice is duty-bound to comply with its terms once served... Continued compliance with the notice, and appearing as required, prevents arrest unless specific reasons for arrest are recorded... Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227
This ensures transparency; arrests without recorded reasons violate safeguards.
Arrest may occur, but only with recorded justification. Arrest can only be made if the Investigating Agency records specific reasons justifying the necessity of arrest, even if the person initially complies. Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227 Similar to CrPC Section 41A, this prevents misuse. Ashwin. C, S/o. Gireeshan. C. VS State Of Kerala - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 984
Exceptions include non-compliance, but even then, reasons must be documented. Courts stress: Arrest without prior permission is not permissible unless the person fails to comply or refuses to identify himself, and even then, arrest must be justified and recorded. Ashwin. C, S/o. Gireeshan. C. VS State Of Kerala - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 984
Courts have clarified applications and pitfalls:
Police cannot summon advocates in their professional capacity via Section 35(3) notices for client matters, as it breaches confidentiality under the Advocates Act, 1961, and Article 19(1)(g). Police cannot summon an advocate in their professional capacity, as it infringes on client confidentiality and legal representation rights. AJIKUMAR K.K S/o KARUNAKARAN PILLAI K, KUNDOOR VS THE STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1096 In one case, a notice to an advocate regarding clients' forgery probe was quashed. AJIKUMAR K.K S/o KARUNAKARAN PILLAI K, KUNDOOR VS THE STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1096
Notices must follow prescribed modes; electronic like WhatsApp are invalid. Even the aforesaid section does not permit notice under Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 to be served through WhatsApp or other electronic modes. Pavankumar VS State of Karnataka Through Adugodi P. S. , Rep. by State Public Prosecutor Supreme Court directions mandate Standing Orders for States/UTs: All States/UTs must issue a Standing Order to their respective Police machinery to issue notices under Section 41-A of CrPC, 1973/Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 only through mode of service as prescribed... Service of notice through WhatsApp... is clearly impermissible. Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 1 Supreme 719Pavankumar VS State of Karnataka Through Adugodi P. S. , Rep. by State Public Prosecutor
Notices aid investigations without overreach, as seen in probes where police issue them instead of summons lacking material links. AJIKUMAR K.K S/o KARUNAKARAN PILLAI K, KUNDOOR VS THE STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1096 Bail applications post-BNSS enforcement follow new provisions, underscoring procedural evolution. In Re: XXX VS State Of Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(Gau) 1360
Recommendations include verifying notice service and reasons before arrests, as advised in analyses. Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227
Section 35(3) BNSS exemplifies reform towards liberty-focused policing. Stay informed on these changes replacing CrPC provisions. For personalized guidance, contact a legal professional.
References:- Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 6 Supreme 227: Core BNSS 35(3) analysis.- Ashwin. C, S/o. Gireeshan. C. VS State Of Kerala - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 984: Arrest conditions.- AJIKUMAR K.K S/o KARUNAKARAN PILLAI K, KUNDOOR VS THE STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 1096, Pavankumar VS State of Karnataka Through Adugodi P. S. , Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2025 1 Supreme 719, Gummadi Gopal Reddy vs The State of Telangana - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 668, Kishtaiah Bacchu vs The State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 54338: Judicial precedents.
This post draws from provided legal documents for educational purposes.
#BNSS #Section35BNSS #ArrestNoticeIndia
It is submitted that this creates a grey area regarding procedural compliance of Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023, by the police officer. 7. ... A notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 to an accused or any individual concerned, qua offences punishable with imprisonment up to 7 years, is the rule. e. ... Hence, we have no hesitation to hold that a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 ....
7. ... Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the police concerned on or before 20.11.2025 and receive notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and the police concerned are also directed to invoke the procedure under Section 35(3) of BNSS and to follow the guidelines formulated ... Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the police have sent the notice under Section 35 (3) of #HL_START....
Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023 lays down the procedure to be followed in case of non-compliance with the notice issued by the Investigating Agency under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023. ... Therefore, when BNSS, 2023 statutorily recognizes electronic mode of service of summons issued by the Court, then the notice issued under Section 35 of the BNSS, 2023 should also be permitted to be served through the electronic mode. 7. ... Sec....
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 7. ... Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has made a complaint on 28.07.2025 against respondent No.3, for threatening arrest and compelling compromise with respondent No.4 in violation of Section 35(3) of BNSS, calling to police station and detaining till night and requested to take action accordingly ... in not giving a notice under Sec....
State of Bihar, AIR 2014 SC 2756, by issuing notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS. 4. ... , before issuing directions under Section 35 of BNSS. ... 7. ... Santosh Singh, learned counsel for respondent-accused No.12. 3. ... Without recording any findings as to whether Section 338 of BNS is applicable to the case at hand, the trial Court directed the Investigating Officer to act under Section 35 of BNSS, which pertains to offences puni....
down under Section 35 (3) of BNSS and the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. ... Though this petition is filed for quashing the proceedings in the crime, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has sought for a direction to the Police to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). ... Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the police have already s....
35(3) of BNSS to the petitioner Nos.3 to 5 also and to proceed with investigation by initiating the procedure laid down under Section 35(3) of BNSS. ... Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are served with notice under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and that they have furnished their explanation also, and has sought for direc....
The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 are directed to co-operate with the investigating officer by filing reply/explanation to the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and to produce any relevant documents/material papers in defence if any in concluding the investigation. ... Though this petition is filed for quashing the proceedings in the crime, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioners has sought for directions to the Police to proceed with investigation by issuing notice under Section 35#HL....
35(3) of BNSS to the petitioner Nos.3 to 5 also and to proceed with investigation by initiating the procedure laid down under Section 35(3) of BNSS. ... Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are served with notice under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and that they have furnished their explanation also, and has sought for direc....
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent No.4 in not taking steps to revoke the notice under Section 35(1)(a) and 35(6) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in Crime Nos.322 of 2025 and 542 of 2025, as illegal. 3. ... The Investigating Officer has already served notices under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and the investigation is almost complete and he is going to file a charge sheet against the accused. 4. .......
7. Section 35 of BNSS outlines the circumstances under which police can arrest a person without a warrant for cognizable offences and mode of issuance of notice in case his arrest is not required. 10. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the police, by issuing Ext.P3 notice, were trying to involve the petitioner in the investigation of the crime alleged against his clients without having any material fact that he has been instrumental in making the fake documents. Ext.P3 notice issued by the police is, in one way, asking the petitione....
Even the aforesaid section does not permit notice under Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 to be served through WhatsApp or other electronic modes. the mandate of Section 41-A of CrPC, 1973/Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 by serving notices through WhatsApp or other electronic modes, instead of following the normal mode of service. Reference is also made to Section 532 of BNSS, 2023 which states that all trials, inquiries and proceedings under BNSS, 2023 may be held in electronic mode, by use of electronic communication or use of audio-video electronic means. 6. In the result, I pass the fo....
DIRECTIONS 11. Having heard the parties and having deliberated upon the aforesaid submissions, this Court in furtherance of Paras. 100.2, 100.8 and 100.9 of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51, and its previous directions contained in earlier orders, deems it necessary to issue the following directions : Hence, the police machinery must not circumvent the mandate of Section 41-A of CrPC, 1973/Section 35 of BNSS, 2023 by serving notices through WhatsApp or other electronic modes, instead of following the normal mode of service. Reference is also made to Section 532....
b. Secondly, the Magistrate has been empowered to conduct such enquiry as he deems necessary before making an order directing registration of FIR. b. Considering the assertions made by the accused public servant as regards the situation that led to the occurrence of the alleged incident. a. First, the requirement of making an application to the Superintendent of Police upon refusal by the officer in charge of a police station to lodge the FIR has been made mandatory, and the applicant making an application under Section 175(3) is required to furnish a copy of the application made to the Supe....
The repealed and saving clause of BNSS reads as under: “531. Repeal and savings--(1) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) is hereby repealed. 6. However, Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam has referred to the decision of the Full Bench of Gujarat High Court rendered in Hiralal Nansa Bhavsar & Anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat, reported in 1974 SCC online Guj 65[Criminal Appeal No.279/1974, dated 03.05.1974] and has argued that the Gujarat High Court while dealing with the saving provision i.e. Section 484 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has delivered the above referr....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
