Top bar body slams ED's 'chilling message to legal community' to senior advocate
The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association on Monday castigated the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoning senior advocate Arvind Datar after he gave legal advice to a firm.
The notice, which was subsequently withdrawn by the ED, was issued to Datar after he reportedly gave legal advice to Care Health Insurance on the ESOP (employee stock ownership) issued to former Religare Enterprises Chairperson Rashmi Saluja.
The SCAORA said such a notice was a "chilling message to the legal community at large and threatens the foundational right of every citizen to receive independent legal counsel without fear or intimidation".
Advocate and president SCAORA Vipin Nair said the ED action was not only unwarranted but also reflected a disturbing trend of investigative overreach that threatened the independence of the legal profession and undermined the very foundation of the rule of law.
"Datar is a respected Senior Advocate of unimpeachable integrity, who has consistently upheld the highest standards of professional conduct and legal ethics,' said SCAORA secretary Nikhil Jain in the statement.
Summoning a senior member of the Bar for discharging his professional responsibility, he said, was a misuse of authority and an affront to the sanctity of the advocate's role.
'The independence of the judiciary and the independence of the Bar are twin pillars of our constitutional democracy. The effective functioning of courts is impossible without fearless and independent advocates. When investigative agencies resort to coercive measures against advocates merely for giving legal opinions, they do not just target individuals, they strike at the institutional structure that ensures justice," the statement added.
The SCAORA further said undermining the professional independence of advocates ultimately threatened judiciary's independence.
It also pointed to several judgments shielding advocates from the purported actions of their clients for merely giving legal opinions.
'The ED's action conflates legal advice with criminal complicity, a proposition that is constitutionally untenable and legally unjustifiable,' it said.
If advocates can be subjected to coercive measures for providing legal advice, it would paralyse the functioning of the legal system and erode public confidence in the justice delivery mechanism, it added.
Though the summon was withdrawn by the ED, the SCAORA lodged its "strong protest" against the "arbitrary exercise of executive power".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
2 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
2 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.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
ED withdraws summons to senior lawyer
NEW DELHI: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Friday withdrew its summons issued against a senior advocate for reportedly giving legal advice in a case, after the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) wrote to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for taking note of the coercive action. The agency wrote to senior advocate Pratap Venugopal, intimating him that the summons have been withdrawn with 'immediate effect'. SCAORA president Vipin Nair had written to CJI B R Gavai on the 'deeply disquieting development' having 'serious ramifications for the independence of the legal profession and the foundational principle of lawyer-client confidentiality'. 'It has come to our notice that senior advocate Pratap Venugopal, has received on June 19, a summons dated June 18, by ED under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in its investigation into the Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) granted by M/s Care Health Insurance Ltd for a purported legal opinion rendered by senior advocate Arvind Datar, wherein Pratap Venugopal, was the advocate-on-record, supporting the grant of stock options to former Religare enterprises chairperson Rashmi Saluja,' the letter said. Venugopal told TNIE the probe agency's action was completely illegal, unconstitutional, unwarranted. 'It is sad and unfortunate. The action of issuing summons to advocates is an alarming practice besides being wholly contrary to the provisions of Sec 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023,' he said.
