logo
ED retreats after uproar, withdraws summons to top advocates

ED retreats after uproar, withdraws summons to top advocates

Indian Express7 hours ago

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Venugopal received a communication from the ED, clarifying that the summons for June 24 had been 'withdrawn'.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

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

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

The Print

timean hour 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

PMLA court grants bail to aide of Dawood's brother
PMLA court grants bail to aide of Dawood's brother

Hindustan Times

timean hour 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.

ED withdraws summons to senior lawyer
ED withdraws summons to senior lawyer

New Indian Express

time2 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.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store