New Delhi: Rejecting the Haryana government’s application to be allowed to serve police summons electronically via WhatsApp, the Supreme Court has reiterated its direction about the police serving physical notices to individuals required for investigation.In an order that was passed on July 16, but uploaded on the court’s website on Wednesday (July 30), a bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh said that any breach of a notice issued by police under Section 41A of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires a person to join an investigation, has serious consequences because it can lead to arrest and deprive individuals of their personal liberty.“We are unable to convince ourselves that electronic communication is a valid mode of service of notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, since its conscious omission is a clear manifestation of the legislative intent,” said the court in its order, reported Hindustan Times.The state of Haryana had approached the Supreme Court challenging the January 21 order passed by the top court in Satinder Kumar Antil v CBI, where the court sought to address gaps in safeguarding the rights of accused facing investigation under various crimes.In its submission to the court, Haryana said that while electronic means were prescribed under BNSS for issuing court notices and summoning witnesses, the same should also be applied to Section 35, as essentially what is required of the individual is to participate in the investigation and not to be arrested.However, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, who was the amicus curiae, told the court that a notice served through WhatsApp or other electronic communication modes is not contemplated as a mode of service under Section 35 of the BNSS.“Introducing a procedure into Section 35 of the BNSS, 2023, that has not been specifically provided for by the legislature, would be violative of its intent,” said the bench after hearing the submissions.“The protection of one’s liberty is a crucial aspect of the right to life guaranteed to each and every individual, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The procedure encapsulated in Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023, seeks to secure this fundamental right from encroachment by the relevant authority, and therefore, any attempt to interpret the provision as a mere procedural one would amount to rewriting the provision itself,” the court added, reported Hindustan Times.The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that service of a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS, 2023 needs to be carried out in a way that protects this substantive right, as non-compliance with the notice can have a drastic effect on the liberty of an individual.