Introduction:

In a recent judicial development, the Supreme Court addressed a petition challenging a gender discriminatory provision within the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (CrPC). The contentious Section 64 of the CrPC had sparked debate due to its requirement that summons be served specifically to an adult male member of a family when the summoned person cannot be found. This provision was criticized for excluding adult female members from accepting summonses on behalf of the summoned person, thereby allegedly infringing upon women’s rights to equality, knowledge, and dignity as enshrined in the Constitution of India.

Arguments:

The petitioner argued that such exclusion was archaic and contradicted the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, which allowed any adult family member, irrespective of gender, to receive summonses. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, initially issued notice on the matter in November 2022, signaling its willingness to examine the constitutional validity of Section 64.

However, in a significant turn of events, the Attorney General for India informed the bench that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 had replaced the CrPC and addressed the grievance by eliminating the gender-specific language. Section 66 of the BNSS now allows any adult family member to receive summonses, thereby rectifying the discriminatory aspect highlighted in the petition.

Judgment:

Consequently, the Supreme Court closed the petition, noting that the enactment of BNSS had effectively rendered the challenge infructuous. This decision marks a pivotal moment in legal history, emphasizing the judiciary’s role in upholding gender equality and adapting legal frameworks to contemporary societal norms.