Section 67 Permits affixture of summons at residence when ordinary service methods fail.
Ensures continuity of criminal process where personal and substituted service are not possible.
Introduction
Section 67 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) provides the procedure to be followed when summons cannot be served through ordinary modes such as personal delivery or service through an adult family member. In such circumstances, the law permits affixing a copy of the summons on a conspicuous part of the residence of the person summoned. This ensures that judicial proceedings are not obstructed due to deliberate evasion or unavailability of the individual.
The provision safeguards procedural efficiency while preserving fairness in service of criminal process.
Objective of the Provision
The objectives of Section 67 BNSS are
- to provide a lawful alternative method of service when earlier modes fail
- to prevent evasion of summons by the person summoned
- to ensure continuity of criminal proceedings
- to maintain procedural reliability in service of court process
The section strengthens enforceability of summons where direct service is impracticable.
Meaning / Concept
Affixture as Substituted Mode of Service
Affixture refers to the act of pasting a duplicate copy of summons at a conspicuous place of the residence or premises where the person ordinarily resides.
This method is adopted only after
- personal service fails, and
- service through an adult family member is not possible
Thus, it operates as a secondary substituted mode of service.
Requirement of Judicial Satisfaction
Service by affixture is not automatically sufficient unless the court, after examining the report of the serving officer, is satisfied that due diligence was exercised before adopting this method.
Detailed Explanation of the Section
Section 67 BNSS provides that
- if service cannot be effected through personal delivery under Section 64 BNSS
- and cannot be effected through family members under Section 66 BNSS
- the serving officer shall affix one duplicate copy of the summons on a conspicuous part of the house or residence where the person ordinarily resides
Thereafter
- the serving officer must return the summons to the court
- the report must describe the circumstances of affixture
- the court may declare that service has been duly effected after verification
Key features include
- applicability only after failure of earlier service methods
- affixture at a conspicuous place of residence
- requirement of service report by serving officer
- judicial satisfaction regarding validity of service
These safeguards ensure authenticity of substituted service.
Procedure or Legal Framework
The procedural framework under Section 67 BNSS generally includes
- attempt at personal service under Section 64 BNSS
- attempt at substituted service through adult family member under Section 66 BNSS
- failure of both methods despite reasonable diligence
- affixture of duplicate summons on conspicuous part of residence
- preparation of service report by serving officer
- submission of report before court for satisfaction regarding validity of service
Only after judicial acceptance does such service become effective.
Judicial Interpretation
Courts have consistently held that substituted service by affixture must strictly comply with statutory safeguards.
In Bhaskar Industries Ltd. v. Bhiwani Denim & Apparels Ltd. (2001) 7 SCC 401, the Supreme Court emphasized that substituted service must be adopted only after genuine attempts at personal service.
In State of Punjab v. Shamlal Murari (1976) 1 SCC 719, the Court observed that procedural safeguards governing service of summons are integral to natural justice and must be strictly followed.
In Sunil Poddar v. Union Bank of India (2008) 2 SCC 326, the Supreme Court reiterated that courts must be satisfied that reasonable efforts were made before accepting substituted service as valid.
These rulings reinforce the requirement of due diligence prior to affixture.
Importance of the Provision
Section 67 BNSS is important because
- it prevents obstruction of proceedings due to avoidance of summons
- it provides a legally recognized substitute for direct service
- it ensures judicial control over substituted service
- it strengthens procedural efficiency in criminal trials
The provision ensures that absence or evasion does not defeat court process.
Connection with Other Sections
Section 67 BNSS operates alongside related provisions governing service of summons
- Section 63 BNSS – Form of summons
- Section 64 BNSS – Summons how served
- Section 66 BNSS – Service when persons summoned cannot be found
- Section 68 BNSS – Proof of service in such cases
Corresponding Provision under Old Law
Section 67 BNSS corresponds to Section 65 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Illustrative Example
A court issues summons to an accused person. The serving officer is unable to serve the summons personally and also finds that no adult family member is available at the residence. The officer affixes a duplicate copy of the summons on the main entrance of the house and submits a report to the court. Upon satisfaction of due diligence, the court treats the service as valid under Section 67 BNSS.
Conclusion
Section 67 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides a structured mechanism for substituted service of summons by affixture when earlier modes of service fail. By requiring due diligence and judicial verification, the provision balances procedural efficiency with fairness in criminal proceedings.
