Supreme Court Issues Strict Guidelines To ED, CBI On Issuing Summons To Lawyers Of Accused
The court said digital devices seized by the ED and CBI can only be opened in a court in the presence of the lawyer and the accused if objections are overruled.
The Supreme Court on Friday issued strict guidelines to investigation agencies, including the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation, on issuing summons to lawyers. In a significant order, the apex court said summons to advocates seeking client details could infringe on the fundamental rights of the accused.
The court said digital devices seized by the ED and CBI can only be opened in a court in the presence of the lawyer and the accused if objections are overruled. The production of digital devices under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, shall be only before a jurisdictional court.
Justice Vinod Chandran pronounced the verdict. Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice N V Anjaria were also part of the bench.
The Supreme Court clarified that the investigating authorities shall not issue a summons to any advocate seeking details of the client, unless it is covered in any of the exceptions under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), which protects confidential communications between lawyers and clients.
When the summons is issued, it should expressly state the facts upon which it has relied.
The top court also set aside a summons by the ED issued to lawyers in a particular case where the court had taken suo motu cognisance.
The court noted that the ED summons to advocates appearing for the accused could result in infringement of the fundamental rights of the accused, who had reposed faith in the lawyer and also violates the statutory provision.
The bench pronounced the order, which had been reserved on Aug. 12 after detailed hearings from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the ED and other parties.
The suo motu proceedings were initiated on July 8 after the court took note of the ED summoning senior lawyers Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal for providing legal opinions or representing clients during investigations.
However, after a lot of hue and cry by the legal fraternity, the ED withdrew its summons to these two lawyers. The court had observed then that it acted as the custodian of citizens’ rights.
