The top court enforced the SMC in recent cases in which two senior lawyers — Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal — were summoned for reportedly giving legal advice or opinion in a case. However, after a lot of hue and cry by the legal fraternity, the ED withdrew its summons to these two lawyers.Nair had also earlier written to the CJI Gavai on the “deeply disquieting development” having “serious ramifications for the independence of the legal profession and the foundational principle of lawyer-client confidentiality”.After the unfortunate incident, Venugopal, talking to TNIE, said the ED action of summoning him was completely illegal, unconstitutional, unwarranted.”It is sad and unforunate. The action of issuing summons to Advocates is an alarming practice and besides being wholly contrary to the provisions of Sec 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023, seeks to intimidate Advocates from advising clients and further identifies Advocates with their clients, which, contrary to well-established principles,” Venugopal had said.SCAORA said that Venugopal is “a widely respected member of the legal fraternity,” whose professional record and sincerity led to his designation as a Senior Advocate earlier this year.”These actions, by the ED, we believe, amount to an impermissible transgression of the sacrosanct lawyer-client privilege,” the letter continues, warning that such coercive measures could have a chilling effect on the legal community,” the SCAORA said.Requesting the Supreme Court to act decisively, the Association urged the Court to examine the legality and propriety of such summonses to legal professionals. “Safeguard the constitutional and professional protections afforded to advocates. Lay down guidelines to prevent further erosion of lawyer-client privilege,” it said.The SCAORA further opined that the role of an advocate, in offering legal advice, is both privileged and protected. Interference by investigative agencies strikes at the heart of the rule of law.
Source link
