Service when persons summoned cannot be found
Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with service when persons summoned cannot be found. Where the person summoned cannot, by the exercise of due diligence, be found, the summons may be served by leaving one of the duplicates for him with some adult member of his family residing with him, and the person with whom the summons is so left shall, if so required by the serving officer, sign The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Where the person summoned cannot, by the exercise of due diligence, be found, the summons may be served by leaving one of the duplicates for him with some adult member of his family residing with him, and the person with whom the summons is so left shall, if so required by the serving officer, sign a receipt therefor on the back of the other duplicate.
Explanation.—A servant is not a member of the family within the meaning of this section.
Section 66, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 64 Service when persons summoned cannot be found Text carried over almost unchanged 99%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 13
- s. 21 Courts by which offences are triable
- s. 67 Procedure when service cannot be effected as before provided
- s. 70 Proof of service in such cases and when serving officer not present
- s. 173 Information in cognizable cases
- s. 180 Examination of witnesses by police
- s. 183 Recording of confessions and statements
- s. 193 Report of police officer on completion of investigation
- s. 218 Prosecution of Judges and public servants
- s. 346 Power to postpone or adjourn proceedings
- s. 366 Court to be open
- s. 397 Treatment of victims
- s. 415 Appeals from convictions
and 1 more
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
G.v. Harsha Kumar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 64, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Before issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant, a court must conduct proper inquiry and record clear and cogent reasons to conclude that the accused is deliberately avoiding summons. The court cannot mechanically issue an NBW without verifying whether proper service of summons was effected according to the procedures laid down in Sections 62-65 CrPC. The issuance of NBW involves interference with personal liberty and therefore requires great caution and careful scrutiny of facts. A court's failure to conduct such inquiry and record reasons constitutes an abuse of process that can be corrected under Section 482 CrPC.
On this section: Service of summons when accused cannot be found; enables service on adult family member
-
G.v. Harsha Kumar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 64, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Before issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant, a court must carefully examine the record and be personally satisfied with clear and cogent reasons that the accused is intentionally and deliberately evading service of summons. The court must conduct proper enquiry into the accused's claim of non-service and cannot mechanically issue a warrant based merely on the investigating agency's assertion of evasion. The issuance of NBW involves interference with personal liberty and therefore requires great caution and complete application of mind. Where an accused comes before the court with a specific allegation that he was not served with summons and had no knowledge of the case, the lower court's finding that he failed to furnish reasons for absence is unjustified.
On this section: Service of summons when accused cannot be found; enables service on adult male family member; cited to show alternative service methods
-
E.ravindran vs The State Rep by
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 64, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of India and personal service of summons is impracticable, the trial court may serve the summons through alternative means such as email, provided the accused is aware of the pending case and the summons. Such alternative service does not violate Sections 62 and 64 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and a procedural challenge to the manner of service does not warrant quashing of the entire criminal case. The accused has a legal obligation to appear before the trial court to participate in the trial and prove his innocence.
On this section: Provides for alternative service methods when the person summoned cannot be found by exercise of due diligence; the court held that email service is a reasonable alternative when the accused resides outside India and personal service is impracticable.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 66
What have the courts held on Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
G.v. Harsha Kumar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh (11 Dec 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 64, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Service of summons when accused cannot be found; enables service on adult family member. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2019 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 66, section 66 BNSS, section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 66 d and bnss 66 c. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with G.v. Harsha Kumar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh (11 Dec 2019).
What should I read with Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
13 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward CrPC 64 (Service when persons summoned cannot be found), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 66 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 66, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.