The Crl.M.C is filed aggrieved by the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner. The specific case put forth by the petitioner is that the summons, alleged to have been sent through WhatsApp to his mobile phone, had never reached him, as he has not downloaded the WhatsApp application on his phone.
4. The above provisions do not provide for service of summons
through WhatsApp. No doubt, the revolutionary changes in the field of communication calls for a more pragmatic approach regarding the mode and manner of service of summons.
6. In the case at hand, the summons is stated to have been
issued through WhatsApp, which is not an accepted mode of service.
As such, the court should not have issued non-bailable warrant against the petitioner on the assumption that he had failed to appear after receiving the summons.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANOOP JACOB Vs STATE OF KERALA
Crl.M.C.No.1658 of 2021
Dated this the 9th day of April, 2021
PRESENT
MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
