The Rajasthan High Court has held that service of summons to a Soldier via WhatsApp is not sufficient in view of Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018 and Order V Rule 28 of the Civil Procedure Code.

The Court was considering a Revision Petition against an order passed by the Family Court by which the Application submitted by the Wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed ex-parte and a direction was issued to the Petitioner- Soldier to pay a maintenance of ₹12,000/- per month.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed, ".......the service of summons upon the petitioner on his WhatsApp mobile number cannot be treated as sufficient in view of the mandate contained under Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018 and under Order V Rule 28 CPC."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Rajendra Rathore, while the Respondent was represented by Additional Government Advocate Amit Punia.

Facts of the Case

Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is a Sepoy and is serving in the Indian Army and at the relevant time, he was posted in the Operational Exigencies Treacherous High Altitude area till September, 2024.

He submitted that an Application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. was submitted by the Wife against the Soldier before the Family Court, wherein Notices were issued, but the same were never served upon him, hence, the Notice was sent on his WhatsApp mobile number.

The Counsel submitted that a copy of the screenshot of the WhatsApp message was produced on the record and that was treated as sufficient service for passing the ex-parte order against the Soldier and accordingly, the order impugned was passed. He submitted that as per the provisions contained under Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018, the process to the Soldier, Sailor and Airman is required to be sent for service to his Commanding Officer together with a copy, which is required to be retained by the person concerned.

The Counsel submitted that as per the mandatory provisions contained under Rule 5 of Order 31, sufficient time shall be given for making arrangements for relieving the concerned person, but in the instant case, the said process/ procedure was not followed and only on the basis of a WhatsApp message, the service upon the Solider was treated as complete.

Reasoning By Court

The Court, at the outset, noted that the question for it to consider was whether service of summons upon a person, who is posted as Soldier, Sailor or Airman in the Armed Forces, sent upon his WhatsApp number, can be treated as sufficient for proceeding ex-parte against him?

It pointed out that the Soldier was posted in operational activities of the Army and he was not to be relieved till September, 2024 and in the meantime, the impugned order was passed.

The Court thus ruled that service of summons to a Soldier via WhatsApp is not sufficient in view of Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018 and Order V Rule 28 of the Civil Procedure Code.

".....The Family Court has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions contained under Order 31 Rule 5 of the General Rules (Civil & Criminal), 2018 and under Order 5 Rule 28 CPC. Hence, the impugned order has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as no reasonable opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner before passing the impugned order against him....", the Court observed.

Cause Title: Deevan Singh v. State Of Rajasthan (2025:RJ-JP:41326)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Rajendra Rathore, Advocate Ajay Poonia, Advocate Lokesh Dholpuria

Respondent- Additional Government Advocate Amit Punia, Advocate Dhura Ram

Click here to read/ download Order









Rajasthan High CourtJustice Anoop Kumar Dhand

Sheetal Joon