NEW DELHI: Admitting that ED erred in summoning senior advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal for rendering legal opinions to clients in a laundering case, attorney general R Venkataramani Monday told Supreme Court that all probe agencies have been asked not to commit this mistake in future.
“We’ll frame guidelines in this regard,” AG told a bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran while it was hearing a suo motu case regarding the summons, which were later withdrawn.
“ED officers are crossing all limits. They must know that under law, communication between a lawyer and his client is a privileged communication ,” Gavai said.
If a lawyer is involved in crime, law will take its own course: CJI
However, if a lawyer is involved in a crime, law will take its own course,” CJI Gavai said. SC would take up petitions filed by various bar associations on July 29 to attempt to lay down comprehensive guidelines in this regard, he added.
On the joint pleas of SCBA president Vikas Singh, SC Advocates-on-Record president Vipin Nair, senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Vijay Hansaria, the CJI-led bench said it would frame guidelines for agencies and bar them from summoning advocates for legal opinion or advice rendered to clients facing prosecution.
While agreeing with AG, solicitor general Tushar Mehta pointed out another malady afflicting some in the legal professions. "It is equally wrong on the part of advocates, who appear for or advise a client, to create a planned narrative in favour of their client and against the probe agency through social media before and after filing of a petition in a court. Lawyers must stick to their duty of presenting the case before the court,” he said.
Mehta said, "The communication between a lawyer and his client is no doubt privileged and which must be immune from investigation, But would a lawyer's action in creating a narrative for his client outside the court also enjoy the status of a privileged communication? Would it not amount to an attempt to influence the public and judiciary about a case?”
CJI Gavai asked, “Have you ever found a judgment or order of a court getting swayed or influenced by such narratives spun by lawyers outside the court? We go by facts and submissions in the courtroom and do not even watch or read what the lawyers speak outside the courtroom about the case.”
Mehta said the issuance of summons to Datar was brought to the notice of the ‘highest executive’ and within six hours a circular was issued by the ED barring its officers from issuing summons to any advocate. Singh, Nair and Hansaria said issuance of summons to advocates by probe agencies would have a chilling effect on the independence of the legal profession.
“We’ll frame guidelines in this regard,” AG told a bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran while it was hearing a suo motu case regarding the summons, which were later withdrawn.
“ED officers are crossing all limits. They must know that under law, communication between a lawyer and his client is a privileged communication ,” Gavai said.
If a lawyer is involved in crime, law will take its own course: CJI
However, if a lawyer is involved in a crime, law will take its own course,” CJI Gavai said. SC would take up petitions filed by various bar associations on July 29 to attempt to lay down comprehensive guidelines in this regard, he added.
On the joint pleas of SCBA president Vikas Singh, SC Advocates-on-Record president Vipin Nair, senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Vijay Hansaria, the CJI-led bench said it would frame guidelines for agencies and bar them from summoning advocates for legal opinion or advice rendered to clients facing prosecution.
While agreeing with AG, solicitor general Tushar Mehta pointed out another malady afflicting some in the legal professions. "It is equally wrong on the part of advocates, who appear for or advise a client, to create a planned narrative in favour of their client and against the probe agency through social media before and after filing of a petition in a court. Lawyers must stick to their duty of presenting the case before the court,” he said.
Mehta said, "The communication between a lawyer and his client is no doubt privileged and which must be immune from investigation, But would a lawyer's action in creating a narrative for his client outside the court also enjoy the status of a privileged communication? Would it not amount to an attempt to influence the public and judiciary about a case?”
CJI Gavai asked, “Have you ever found a judgment or order of a court getting swayed or influenced by such narratives spun by lawyers outside the court? We go by facts and submissions in the courtroom and do not even watch or read what the lawyers speak outside the courtroom about the case.”
Mehta said the issuance of summons to Datar was brought to the notice of the ‘highest executive’ and within six hours a circular was issued by the ED barring its officers from issuing summons to any advocate. Singh, Nair and Hansaria said issuance of summons to advocates by probe agencies would have a chilling effect on the independence of the legal profession.
You may also like
Elli AvrRam: 'How can a monkey know the taste of ginger', why did Elli AvrRam say this about Ashish Chanchlani?
ITR Tips: Keep these documents with you before filing ITR, otherwise your work will get stuck in the middle..
UGC NET 2025 exam result declared - check your scorecard like this
Sanjay Dutt's Sweet Birthday Wish for Maanayata
Vegetable Vendor From Karnataka Receives GST Notice To Pay 29 Lakh; Department Keeping "Close Watch" On Merchants
