New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) Friday issued a circular to its officers instructing them not to summon any advocate as part of the investigation, as it could amount to a violation of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA).
The move followed strong condemnation by several associations of lawyers of the ED summons issued to two senior advocates in connection with a money-laundering probe.
Section 132 of the BSA protects lawyers from disclosing information related to clients without their consent.
The ED circular, a copy of which has been seen by ThePrint, further said that, in exceptional circumstances, when summons have to be issued, it can only be done after the approval of the agency director.
From Section 132, “it is amply clear that a legal practitioner cannot be compelled to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his professional service as such legal practitioner, by or on behalf of his client unless with his client’s express consent. However, proviso to Section 132 of the BSA, 2023 has carved out certain exceptions,” said the circular issued by ED’s legal wing to field officers.
“In view of the above, it is directed that no summons shall be issued to any advocate in violation of Section 132. Further, if any summon needs to be issued under the exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 132 of the BSA, the same shall be issued with the prior approval of the Director, ED,” it added.
The development comes at a time when the ED has drawn criticism from the legal community over summoning senior advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal in its probe into dealings of Care Health Insurance (CHIL) and its parent company, Religare Enterprises (REL). Both summonses have been withdrawn.
In a letter dated 16 June, the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association expressed “strong disapproval” of the summons to Datar and said it reflected “a disturbing trend of investigative overreach”.
ThePrint had earlier reported that the ED has been probing money laundering allegations against these firms, including the transfer of shares worth crores to former CHIL non-executive chairperson and REL executive chairperson Rashmi Saluja despite the request being rejected by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI).
The former board of CHIL cited an opinion that it had sought from Datar to grant shares to Saluja. According to the ED, Datar said IRDAI’s approval was not needed since the shares were being granted in her capacity as an REL employee, and not CHIL.
Separately, Venugopal was summoned in his capacity as the former independent director of CHIL to understand the circumstances behind the share transfer, the ED spokesperson said.
In a statement Friday, the ED spokesperson said, “In view of the fact that Shri Pratap Venugopal is a Senior Advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the summons issued to him has been withdrawn and same has been communicated to him.
“In the said communication, it has also been stated that if any documents will be required from him in his capacity as an Independent Director of CHIL, the same will be requested from him to be submitted by email.”
(Edited by Sanya Mathur)
Also Read: ED’s now-withdrawn summons to Arvind Datar: The case, controversy & SC advocates body letter