Summoning lawyers over client matters threatens administration of justice, says SC
Considering the importance of the matter, the Court ordered that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for appropriate directions.
Meanwhile, the Court granted interim relief to the lawyer who was summoned by the police in Gujarat.
'There shall be a stay on the High Court order and a stay on the operation of summons and any other notices issued to the petitioner,' the Court ordered.
The court order comes just days after a controversy broke out over Enforcement Directorate (ED)'s summons to Senior Advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal in relation to an investigation involving the Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) granted by Care Health Insurance (CHIL) to former Religare Enterprises Chairperson Rashmi Saluja.
Both summons were withdrawn following strong resolutions issued by Bar associations across the country. In response, the ED also issued a circular directing its officials not to summon advocates in violation of Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) had earlier written to Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, urging the Court to take suo motu cognizance of the increasing instances of lawyers being summoned by investigating agencies.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
8 minutes ago
- Hans India
ED grills actor Rana in illegal betting app case
Hyderabad: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) grilled film actor Rana Daggubati on Monday in connection with a case booked against several persons for promoting illegal betting apps. The actor submitted his bank statements in support of his argument that he did not get any financial benefits by promoting the betting apps in question. Sources said that the ED sleuths questioned Rana for more than four hours, seeking clarifications on the allegations of his having received huge money in lieu of promoting the betting apps. The Cyberabad Police booked a criminal case against popular film actors Rana Daggubati, Vijay Devarakonda and Prakash Raj, among others, for promoting betting apps in violation of norms through pop-up ads on various social media platforms. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had registered an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against 29 individuals, including actors, television hosts, social media influencers, and YouTubers, for allegedly promoting illegal betting applications in breach of the Public Gambling Act, 1867. The case was booked under provisions of 318(4), 112 read with 49 BNS and Section 3, 3(A), 4 of TS Gaming Act and Section (D) of IT Act based on a complaint lodged by PM Phanindra Sarma, a businessman and a resident of Miyapur. The ED has already questioned Devarakonda and Prakash Raj. Official sources said that Rana arrived at the ED office, along with his advocate and submitted the required documents to the probing agency. The ED will analyze the documents to ascertain the role of Rana in the promotion of betting apps and financial benefits, if any, received by him against the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC junks plea by ex-CM Baghel questioning ED's investigations
The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a petition by former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Kumar Baghel questioning the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) powers to carry out 'further investigation' and keep filing charge sheets under section 44 of the prevention of money laundering act (PMLA). SC junks plea by ex-CM Baghel questioning ED's investigations A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi held that the provision has procedural safeguards as held in the landmark decision of the top court in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary (2022) upholding the PMLA provisions and left it open for Baghel or any other petitioner to challenge any breach of these safeguards by ED. Disposing Baghel's petition, the bench said, 'There is no gainsay that if ED/authority has acted contrary to the above stated principles explained in the VMC case, aggrieved persons including the petitioner can approach the appropriate forum or the high court.' Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Baghel pointed out that the petition challenged section 44 of PMLA besides other provisions of the anti-money laundering act for being too broad as it allows ED to keep arresting persons, forcing them to give statements, and filing charge sheets, jeopardising the liberty of citizens. He approached the court apprehending his arrest in the Chhattisgarh liquor scam after his son was arrested last month by the ED. The bench said, 'An investigation is never against an accused. It is against an offence. So an accused, in terms of investigation, may be incidental.' The court said that the provision for further investigation is provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) recognizing the power available with the investigating agency to secure the ends of justice and undertake a voyage in pursuit of finding truth. 'Further investigation also enures to the benefit of the accused to find out if the accused is really culpable,' the court observed. Sibal questioned such power under section 44 of the PMLA as he observed that ED officer is not a police officer. He questioned that the PMLA being a special statute, not all procedural safeguards under CrPC are applicable to accused arrested by ED. The court refused to entertain Baghel's plea by saying, 'If at all there is abuse by ED, that does not make the law vulnerable. Breach of procedure in individual cases does not mean there is a constitutional flaw in the legislation. In a case where ED is acting contrary, let the concerned person go to court.' Baghel's petition filed through advocate VIpin Nair said, 'The PMLA does not, at any stage, confer substantive powers of 'further investigation' upon officers of the ED. Section 44 of the Act, which merely deals with the procedural aspects concerning the cognizance and trial of offences before the Special Court, falls under Chapter VII of the PMLA and is not a source of investigative powers.' It further stated, 'The ED is illegally and arbitrarily exercising their power, despite having no express authority under the PMLA, conducting 'further investigation' in several cases and filing incomplete or piecemeal prosecution complaints resulting in arbitrary detention, harassment, and a grave violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.'
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
ED faces 'wall of the dead' as Vadra puts burden on deceased colleagues
NEW DELHI: In its investigations against Robert Vadra , the Enforcement Directorate faces a "Wall of the Dead" with Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi 's spouse putting the burden of explaining the issues thrown up by the money laundering probe on his colleagues, who assisted him acquire properties in Delhi-NCR, but have since passed away. These properties are collectively estimated to be worth several hundred crores of rupees at current market prices. Vadra's statement was recorded at the ED headquarters here on April 15 in connection with a 3.5 acres of land deal in Gurgaon and transactions done by his Skylight Hospitality Pvt Ltd (SLHPL) and Skylight Realty Pvt Ltd (SLRPL). According to the chargesheet, Vadra was asked to explain how his company could have issued a cheque of Rs 7.5 crore (to the seller of the 3.5 acre land) when the bank account had only Rs 1 lakh balance. He responded by saying, "All financial transactions were taken by late Rajesh Khurana. He must have had a financial plan or understanding of how to act on this land and with the vision of late HL Pahwa would have planned the future financially or sale of this land." On all the transactions related to the land deal - its payment, sale deed registration and stamp duty payment - Vadra said the "information of the same must have been by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like AI is changing the way you learn a language Talkpal AI Learn More Undo financial matters were handled by late Rajesh Khurana and all decisions related to the same would be handled by late Rajesh Khurana, late HL Pahwa and late Mahesh Nagar". Land possessions of Vadra and Priyanka include 40 acres in Faridabad. The responses struck ED investigators for the resemblance they do to the ones given by Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi during the money laundering probe related to the National Herald case . Quoting from their statements, ED in its chargesheet against the Gandhis noted that both Sonia and Rahul parried questions related to acquisition of National Herald by Young Indian, in which they together own 76% stake, for a paltry Rs 50 lakh, saying that only the then Congress treasurer Motilal Vora, who passed away more than four years ago, knew the answers. "Robert Vadra has been evasive in his replies and did not provide any answers to the questions posed to him for explaining the transactions entered by SLHPL and SLRPL with OPPL (Onkareshwar Properties Pvt Ltd). However, the documentary evidence collected during the course of investigation clearly establishes that the sale consideration was suppressed, and thus, the misrepresentations were made in the sale deed as well as in the balance sheet of these entities," ED has noted in its chargesheet. In the National Herald money laundering case, in his responses to six of 10 questions put to him, Rahul had said, "Motilal Vora would be aware of the transactions". As per the chargesheet, when Sonia, too, was asked to specify the purpose of floating Young Indian, she told investigating officers that only "Vora would have been aware". She, however, could not produce documents to substantiate her claim, ED alleged in its chargesheet.
