Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 94
Summons to produce document or other thing
(1) Whenever any Court or any officer in charge of a police station considers that the production of any document, electronic communication, including communication devices, which is likely to contain digital evidence or other thing is necessary or desirable for the purposes of any investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita by or before such Court or officer, such Court may issue a summons or such officer may, by a written order, either in physical form or in electronic form, require the person in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be, to attend and produce it, or to produce it, at the time and place stated in the summons or order.
(2) Any person required under this section merely to produce a document, or other thing shall be deemed to have complied with the requisition if he causes such document or thing to be produced instead of attending personally to produce the same.
(3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed—
(a) to affect sections 129 and 130 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 or the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 (13 of 1891); or
(b) to apply to a letter, postcard, or other document or any parcel or thing in the custody of the postal authority.
Why this exists
This provision continues the long-standing power (earlier found in Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) that lets courts and police compel production of evidence without needing a search or seizure. It balances investigative needs against personal liberty by using a summons/order rather than forceful search. The 2023 update explicitly adds 'electronic communication' and 'communication devices' to reflect the reality of digital evidence — phones, emails, and computer files — which the older law did not expressly mention.
How courts read it
Under the identical CrPC Section 91, courts (including the Supreme Court) held that such orders must be specific about the document or thing sought and cannot be used as a roving or fishing inquiry. Courts also clarified that a person can challenge an unreasonable or vague summons, and that compliance by merely producing the item (without personal appearance) is valid unless personal examination is also required under some other provision. These interpretive principles are expected to carry over to Section 94 of the BNSS, though specific judgments interpreting the new section's digital evidence language are still developing.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: A summons under this section means the person must appear in court or the police station in person.
Fact: If only a document or object is required, sending or producing it is enough — personal attendance isn't needed unless separately required. - Myth: This section lets police search someone's phone or home directly.
Fact: It only allows an order or summons demanding production of a specific item; it is not a search or seizure power. - Myth: This section covers requests for bank records and postal items too.
Fact: It expressly excludes bankers' books evidence (governed by other laws) and items in postal custody.