New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday laid down safeguards restricting investigating agencies from summoning advocates representing accused persons, observing that such actions could infringe upon the fundamental rights of the accused and violate statutory provisions protecting lawyer-client privilege.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria, delivering its decision in the suo motu case titled “In Re: Summoning Advocates Who Give Legal Opinion or Represent Parties During Investigation of Cases and Related Issues”, directed that investigating officers will not issue summons to lawyers appearing for the accused except under narrowly defined circumstances, provisions provided in Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023.
The CJI Gavai-led Bench further directed that when such summons are issued, they must be approved by an officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police (SP).
To enable judicial review, the apex court mandated that the summons should expressly state the facts and circumstances relied upon by the investigating agency.
The CJI Gavai-led Bench clarified that a summons to counsel may be issued only if the case falls within the exceptions enumerated under Section 132 of the BSA, 2023. Even in such cases, the exceptions invoked must be clearly specified in the summons itself.
The suo motu proceedings were initiated after concerns were raised regarding investigating agencies summoning advocates for legal opinions or for representing clients in judicial proceedings.
During the hearing, the apex court had observed that such actions could strike at the root of the legal profession’s independence and undermine the legally protected attorney-client privilege.
Attorney General of India R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, both appearing for the Centre, agreed that lawyers cannot be summoned merely for providing legal advice.
Solicitor General Mehta had, however, said that exceptional cases — such as when a lawyer is alleged to have participated in an unlawful act — could be treated differently, subject to judicial oversight.
Earlier, a two-judge bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and N.K. Singh had highlighted the need for comprehensive guidelines, noting that summoning advocates in such circumstances not only violated their professional rights but also posed a serious threat to the autonomy of the Bar.
The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) had also urged the apex court to safeguard the sanctity of the lawyer-client relationship and frame clear directions to prevent any misuse of investigative powers against legal professionals.
(IANS)
