ED retreats after uproar, withdraws summons to top advocates

Under fire from the legal fraternity over its summons to Senior Advocates Pratap Venugopal and Arvind Datar in connection with a case in which they had rendered legal advice, the Enforcement Directorate said Friday it had instructed field formations not to issue summons to any advocate in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — the section deals with the confidentiality of communications between an advocate and client.
Any exception necessitating the issue of summons 'shall be issued only with the prior approval of the Director, ED', the probe agency said in a statement to the press.
The ED's summons to Datar and Venugopal had drawn not just criticism but also raised questions on whether such summons can dilute attorney-client privilege. The lawyers were summoned under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in a case of alleged money laundering.
It is learnt that Datar wrote to the agency, expressing his inability to respond to the summons, citing attorney-client privilege. Sources in the ED told The Indian Express that the summons to Datar had 'expired' and no fresh summons had been issued.
Venugopal received a communication from the ED, clarifying that the summons for June 24 had been 'withdrawn'.
Non-compliance of summons by the ED is an offence under the PMLA. However, lawyers are protected under evidentiary laws from being compelled to issue statements or testify against their clients.
Advocate Vipin Nair, President of the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association, wrote to Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, urging him to take suo motu action against the ED.
'These actions, by the ED, we believe, amount to an impermissible transgression of the sacrosanct lawyer-client privilege, and pose a serious threat to the autonomy and fearless functioning of advocates. Such unwarranted and coercive measures against senior members of the Bar for discharge of professional duties set a dangerous precedent, potentially resulting in a chilling effect across the legal community,' Nair wrote.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) too condemned the ED summons to Venugopal and Datar, saying the actions 'reflect a disturbing trend, striking at the very foundations of the legal profession and undermining the independence of the Bar' and also reflect 'an illegal, perverse and intimidatory use of state power'.
A statement issued by Advocate Pragya Baghel said 'the Executive Committee of… SCBA unanimously resolved and expresses its deep anguish, concern and unequivocal condemnation of the action taken by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in summoning and issuance of Notice to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Senior Advocate and member of SCBA, for the services rendered in discharge of professional duty.'
On Friday, in its statement to the press, the ED said, 'The Mumbai Branch of ED is conducting a money-laundering investigation in which it has been alleged that shares of M/s Care Health Insurance Ltd (CHIL) were issued at a much lower price in the form of ESOPs on 1st May, 2022, in spite of the rejection of the same by Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI).'
'As part of investigation, a summons was issued to Shri Pratap Venugopal, an Independent Director of CHIL, to understand the circumstances under which the company has issued the ESOPs despite its rejection by IRDAI and subsequent discussions in the Board of CHIL in this regard. It is also pertinent to note that IRDAI on 23.07.2024 had directed the CHIL to revoke or cancel any ESOPs that have yet to be allotted and has also imposed a penalty of Rs 1 crore on CHIL for non-compliance with regulatory directions,' the ED 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,' it said.
'Further, the ED has also issued a circular for the guidance of the field formations that no summons shall be issued to any Advocate in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Further, if any summons needs to be issued under the exceptions carved out in proviso to section 132 of the BSA, 2023, the same shall be issued only with the prior approval of the Director, ED,' the agency said.
— With ENS inputs
Apurva Vishwanath is the National Legal Editor of The Indian Express in New Delhi. She graduated with a B.A., LL. B (Hons) from Dr Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. She joined the newspaper in 2019 and in her current role, oversees the newspapers coverage of legal issues. She also closely tracks judicial appointments. Prior to her role at the Indian Express, she has worked with ThePrint and Mint. ... Read More

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

News18

2 hours ago

• News18

ED Busts Multinational Terror Funding Network Linked To PFI & SDPI

Last Updated: The operation ran a shadow economy that facilitated the movement of over Rs 62 crore to finance illegal activities, including terror training and mobilising citizens against India The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has uncovered a massive criminal network orchestrated by the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its political arm, the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), following a lengthy investigation that exposed their involvement in financing terrorist training, communal unrest, and radicalisation activities across India. According to sources within the ED, the criminal operation ran a shadow economy that facilitated the movement of over Rs 62 crore in illicit funds, which were funnelled through a web of fraudulent financial practices, fake trusts, underground Hawala networks, and a dedicated chain of operatives. The network, with both domestic and international connections, was strategically built to finance illegal activities, including terror training, communal violence, and mobilising citizens against the Indian state. MK Faizy: The Mastermind Behind the Operation At the heart of this extensive conspiracy lies MK Faizy, the National President of SDPI and a member of the National Executive Council (NEC) of PFI. According to the ED investigation, Faizy was the mastermind behind the financial operations of SDPI, playing a pivotal role in orchestrating PFI's underground economy. His position allowed him to mobilise funds both domestically and internationally, especially from Gulf nations such as Qatar and UAE, where a significant portion of the illicit funds originated. Faizy personally oversaw the fundraising efforts, which included cash donations, cadre fees, and money laundering through SDPI's organisational bank accounts. ED sources revealed that Faizy personally handled Rs 15.4 lakh in illicit funds through HDFC Bank, disguising it as legitimate political income. These funds were then redirected to support violent riots, murder plots, and radical training camps, including several notorious terror-linked operations. Faizy's central role within SDPI and his direct involvement in terror financing has led the ED to label him as the primary architect of a sophisticated, transnational terror financing network. Faizy's operations were further bolstered by his close associate Wahidur Rahman, who managed field operations and controlled the actual cash channels used to funnel funds through party sympathisers. Rahman coordinated with various operatives to move illicit money, ensuring its effective use in SDPI's physical operations, including acts of violence and destabilising protests. Rauf Sherif, a crucial player in the network, headed the Campus Front of India (CFI), which is linked to PFI's student front. Sherif played a significant role in channelling funds from abroad through Shafeeque Payeth, a key operator based in Doha. Payeth's operations in the Gulf were integral to the transfer of cash from overseas donors into SDPI's hands. In addition, Ashraf MK and Abdul Razak were pivotal in converting illicit funds into real estate and property, further laundering the money into legitimate assets. The SDPI state units across various regions were also involved in hoarding and laundering the money, acting as crucial storage points for the criminal funds. The investigation also revealed Rasheed and Kunju, two operatives linked to SDPI, who were directly involved in physical crimes funded by SDPI. These individuals were integral to the violent operations on the ground, executing plans for communal violence, and engaging in illegal acts designed to fuel unrest and radicalisation across Indian states. Well-Organised Transnational Conspiracy The case has unravelled a carefully coordinated and expansive network of radicalisation and terror financing, which operated not only through domestic channels but also extended across borders. The SDPI-PFI nexus, through its transnational network, sought to utilise political and civil liberties infrastructure to further their ideological war against the Indian state. They exploited legal avenues, including using their political party status and social activism fronts, to mask their true intentions—funding terrorism and radicalisation efforts. The network used underground hawala networks, illegal cash donations, and fraudulent financial practices to raise money from sympathisers abroad, while simultaneously using the SDPI's political influence to create public disturbances, thereby feeding into their larger goal of sowing discord and instability within the nation. Following the unearthing of this network, the Enforcement Directorate has initiated a series of actions, including freezing accounts, seizing properties linked to illicit transactions, and interrogating key members of PFI and SDPI. The investigation is ongoing, with the ED planning to expand the probe into the wider network of international financiers and operatives involved. Sources close to ED have stated that further arrests and more seizures are expected as the investigation deepens, and international cooperation may be sought to bring to justice those operating from foreign territories, particularly the Gulf countries, which have emerged as key nodes in the funding network. About the Author Manoj Gupta Group Editor, Investigations & Security Affairs, Network18 Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 21, 2025, 12:06 IST

The Print

5 hours ago

• The Print

ED takes lesson from Datar & Venugopal episodes, director's nod now must to summon advocates

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. 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 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

Hindustan Times

5 hours ago

• Hindustan Times

PMLA court grants bail to aide of Dawood's brother

MUMBAI: A special court constituted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) has granted bail to Israd Sayyed, an aide of Iqbal Kaskar, the younger brother of fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim, in connection with a money laundering case. Munbai : File photo of underworld don Dawood Ibrahim's brother Iqbal Kaskar who was arrested on Monday night by the crime branch of the Thane Police in connection with an investigation into an extortion case. PTI Photo (PTI9_19_2017_000047B) (PTI) The ED had accused Kaskar and his aides, Israd Sayyed and Mumtaz Shaikh, of being the masterminds behind extortion of money and property from builders, and of being knowingly indulging in laundering of proceeds of crime to the tune of ₹ 78.63 lakh. The extortion complaint had alleged that in 2017, Kaskar and his associates extorted ₹ 30 lakh in cash and a flat worth ₹ 60 lakh in the Neopolis building in Thane from local builder Suresh Jain. Kaskar and his aides allegedly threatened the builder using Dawood's name and took the flat in the name of Mumtaz Ejaj Shaikh alias Raju, a close associate of Iqbal. The builder had filed an FIR at the Kasarvadavali police station, claiming that Kaskar's associates made repeated visits and continued to pressurise him. Based on the FIR, the ED initiated a money laundering investigation on September 26, 2017, and filed a chargesheet in 2022. Sayyed's advocate submitted that he is innocent and has committed no crime. The defence stated that he was acquitted under the original MCOCA case based on which the ED case was registered. Relying on the ground of parity, the defence argued that Kaskar has already been granted bail by the high court in the same case. The prosecution argued that Sayyed cannot avail the ground of parity as he threatened Mehta and extorted one flat and ₹ 20 lakhs from him. The court observed that the role of Sayyed is similar to that of Kaskar, who was released on bail by the high court. The court said that Sayyed is also acquitted in the MCOCA case, which is the predicate offence. The special sessions judge, Mahesh K Jadhav, in an order passed on June 16, said, 'The applicant is also in jail for a long time,' and held that Sayyed is entitled to be released on bail on the grounds of parity.