Following a huge backlash over summons issued to two Senior Advocates in relation to their legal opinions to a client, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has come up with a circular prohibiting its officials from issuing summons to lawyers in connection with their legal opinions.
The circular said that no summons should be issued to any Advocate in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Further if any summons needed to be issued under the exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 132 of BSA, 2023, the same shall be issued only with the prior approval of the ED Director, it added.
The national agency also shared the information on its official X handle.
Section 132 of BSA enshrined the principle of lawyer-client privilege.
It said that no advocate, at any time be permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his service as such lawyer, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional service, or to disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such service.
The Section further provided that nothing shall protect from disclosure of any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal purpose; any fact observed by any advocate, in the course of his service as such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the commencement of his service.
As per the law, it was immaterial whether the attention of such advocate referred to in the proviso to sub-section (1), was or was not directed to such fact by or on behalf of his client.
The obligation stated in this Section would continue after the professional service ceased, it added.
The ED sleuths had recently issued summons to two Senior Advocates – Arvind P Datar and Pratap Venugopal – in connection with their legal advice to M/s Care Health Insurance on the ESOP (employee stock ownership) issued to former Religare Enterprises chairperson Dr Rashmi Saluja.
Thise move invited criticism from various Bar bodies across the country, with some associations urging the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance and formulate guidelines to prevent further erosion of lawye- client privilege.
The federal agency eventually withdrew the summons issued to both Senior Advocates.