In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has initiated a suo motu case concerning the issue of investigative agencies summoning advocates for the legal advice they provide to their clients. This step underscores the judiciary’s concern for protecting the independence of the legal profession and upholding the fairness of the justice system.
The matter is listed for hearing on July 14 before a bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, along with Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria. The case is titled "In Re: Summoning Advocates Who Give Legal Opinion or Represent Parties During Investigation of Cases and Related Issues" and is registered as SMW(Cal) 2/2025.
Read also:- Jharkhand High Court Enhances Alimony to ₹90K for Wife and Autistic Son, Citing Husband’s High Income
The issue came into sharp focus on June 25, when a bench of Justice KV Viswanathan and Justice NK Singh expressed serious concern over a growing pattern in which police and investigative agencies summon advocates. This was in response to an incident where Gujarat Police summoned an advocate representing an accused in a case. The bench stayed the notice issued to the lawyer and remarked:
"Summoning advocates for giving legal opinion or representation will seriously undermine the independence of the legal profession and affect the fair administration of justice."
Following this observation, the matter was referred to the Chief Justice of India, leading to the registration of the suo motu case on July 4.
Read also:- Under-Construction Flat Not a 'Shared Household' Under DV Act: Bombay High Court
The issue has gained further traction after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoned two Senior Advocates, Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal, for the legal advice they had offered to their clients. This move triggered strong protests from various Bar Associations across the country. Reacting to the criticism, the ED withdrew the summons and issued a circular that:
"Summons to lawyers should not be issued without the prior approval of the Director of Enforcement."
This incident has reignited a critical debate around the protection of advocates’ professional duties and privileges. Legal experts emphasize that compelling lawyers to disclose their advice could violate the principle of attorney-client privilege, a cornerstone of the justice delivery system.
The Supreme Court’s decision to take suo motu cognizance of this issue is being widely welcomed as a timely intervention aimed at reinforcing legal ethics and the autonomy of the legal profession.