Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 519 (GAU)

Bimal Krishna Nath v. State of Assam

2019-04-29

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, MIR ALFAZ ALI

body2019
ORDER : ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUAH, J. The office note dated 3.12.2018 provides that step was taken on the respondent No. 2 on 23.11.2013 by registered post by mentioning the proper address and accordingly, by invoking the power under section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1987, service was deemed to have been effected on the respondent No. 2. 2. We are unable to accept the office note dated 3.12.2018 to the extent that section 27 of the General Clauses Act is inapplicable in the present case. 3. Section 27 of the General Clauses Act provides that where any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of the Act authorizes or requires any document to be served by post, the service shall be deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting by registered post. 4. In the instant case, the service of notice on the accused respondent No. 2 was required to be taken under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (‘Cr.PC). 5. The Cr.PC nowhere provides for the service of any notice on the respondents by registered post. As the Central Act or Regulation referred under section 27 of the General Clauses Act in the present case, would be the Cr.PC and the Cr.PC itself having not provided for service of notice on the respondents by registered post, the provision of section 27 in respect of any notice being served by post upon the respondents in a proceeding under the Cr.PC, would be inapplicable. 6. If upon service of notice on the respondents in the proceeding under the Cr.PC had actually been served which was duly acknowledged by the concerned respondents or upon such service the respondent enters cippearance in the court, a service through the method of registered post may be acceptable. But when such notice could not be served by post, where it was addressed in the proper manner, the postal fee being prepared and it being effected by registered post, the provision of section 27 of the General Clauses Act cannot be relied upon nor make it deemed that such notice had been served. 7. But when such notice could not be served by post, where it was addressed in the proper manner, the postal fee being prepared and it being effected by registered post, the provision of section 27 of the General Clauses Act cannot be relied upon nor make it deemed that such notice had been served. 7. More so, we cannot be oblivious of the fact that this is an appeal against acquittal, where if the order dated 3.12.2018 is allowed to stand, the same would require a hearing of the appeal against acquittal without the accused having been actually served any notice in the appeal. Accordingly, the appellant to take steps for service of notice on the accused-respondent No. 2 through the Registry to be served through the Officer in-charge of Panbazar Police Station. 8. The Officer in-charge, Panbazar Police Station shall accordingly submit a report of service before the next date fixed. 9. The order be circulated by the Registry within itself as well as to all such criminal courts where notice upon respondents/opposition parties may be effected through the means of service by registered post. 10. List this matter after two weeks.