नवीनतम
SC sets aside summons issued by ED to two lawyers
NEW DELHI [Maha Media]: The Supreme Court on Friday held that no summons can be issued against an advocate in connection with legal advice rendered in a criminal case, unless the matter was covered under an exception under Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA).
The judgment was delivered by a bench led by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and comprising justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria.
The bench said that the investigating officers would not issue a summons to an advocate who represented the accused to know the details of the case, unless the matter was covered under any of the exceptions under Section 132. The bench said Section 132 of the BSA was a privilege conferred on the advocate.
The apex court set aside the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate to two senior lawyers, and laid down guidelines restricting probe agencies from calling advocates for questioning over legal advice given to clients.
The bench delivered the verdict in a suo motu case registered after issuance of summons to two senior advocates by the central agency.
Justice Chandran, pronouncing the verdict on behalf of the bench, said the court had sought to “harmonise the exemption to the rule” protecting advocates. He said the bench has issued fresh directions to safeguard the legal profession from undue pressure by probe agencies.
The bench made it clear that summons to the lawyers would not be issued without the consent of a superior officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police, who would record satisfaction as to the exception in the provision.
The bench said no summons can be issued to the advocate for the production of documents in civil and criminal cases.
In June, this year, the ED had issued summons against senior advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in its investigation into the Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) granted by M/s Care Health Insurance Ltd for a purported legal opinion rendered by them supporting the grant of Stock Options to former Religare Enterprises Chairperson, Rashmi Saluja.
The Bar bodies criticised the decision by terming it a move fraught with serious ramifications for the independence of the legal profession and the foundational principle of lawyer-client confidentiality. The summons was withdrawn by the central agency.
The apex court Advocate on Record Association president, Vipin Nair, on June 20, urged CJI to take a suo motu cognisance of those summonses.
