Mint Explainer: Why ED's summons to top lawyers in stock options case sparked a legal firestorm
Though the ED withdrew the notices after mounting criticism and backlash, the episode has reignited the debate on the sanctity of attorney-client privilege, the independence of legal advice, and the limits of investigative overreach.
Mint explains the controversy, the key legal flashpoints, and the broader implications for lawyer-client confidentiality in high-stakes corporate investigations.
What is the case about?
From 2021 to 2023, Care Health Insurance, a subsidiary of Religare Enterprises Ltd, granted 22.71 million stock options valued at over ₹250 crore to Rashmi Saluja, who was the non-executive chairperson of Care and executive chairperson of Religare.
This violated the insurance regulator's 2018 circular capping the remuneration of non-executive directors at ₹10 lakh, unless prior approval was secured. Even after specific instructions from the regulator in May 2022 not to proceed without approval, Care went ahead.
Also Read | What next for the Burmans now that they have won the battle for Religare
In November 2023, the regulator found Care to be in breach of compensation norms, ordered the cancellation of unvested/unexercised stock options, and directed the buyback of 7.57 million shares already allotted to Saluja at ₹45.32 per share. A ₹1 crore penalty followed in July 2024.
The Mumbai Police's Economic Offences Wing filed a complaint, prompting the ED to initiate a money laundering probe. In August 2024, the agency conducted search operations and froze the disputed shares, examining whether they were used to facilitate broader financial misconduct.
Why were the senior lawyers summoned?
As part of the probe, the ED examined how Care Health justified the stock options despite regulatory red flags. The company had relied on legal advice from senior counsel Arvind Datar and former Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India chairperson J. Hari Narayan. Pratap Venugopal, who filed one of the legal opinions, was also summoned.
The summons was issued to Datar on 12 June and to Venugopal on 19 June, asking for records of their legal advice, communications, and fee/payment details.
Datar is a senior advocate of the Supreme Court known for high-stakes commercial, tax and regulatory litigation, including regular appearances for the Securities and Exchange Board of India. Venugopal has been a designated senior advocate since 31 January 2025 and formerly a founding partner at K.J. John & Co.
Why did the ED withdraw the summons?
Facing widespread criticism, the ED clarified that the lawyers were not accused and were summoned to assist in understanding the legal rationale behind awarding the stock options. However, Datar refused to appear, citing protections under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which bars compelled disclosure of privileged legal communication.
With pressure mounting from top bar associations, the ED withdrew the summons—first to Datar on 14 June and then to Venugopal on 20 June. Later that day, the ED issued a circular clarifying that no such summons can be issued without prior approval.
Also Read | Rahul Navin appointed as new director of Enforcement Directorate for two years
'No summons shall be issued to any advocate in violation of Section 132 of the BSA, 2023. Further, if any summon needs to be issued under the exceptions carved out in the proviso to Section 132... the same shall be issued with the prior approval of the Director, ED."
The circular acknowledged that some field units had summoned advocates during investigations to produce communications and documents—actions that risk infringing upon legal privilege.
How did the legal fraternity respond?
The ED's summons to senior advocates in the Care Health–Religare case sparked strong condemnation from India's leading bar associations, which viewed it as an attack on the independence of the legal profession and the sanctity of client-lawyer privilege.
'This action by the ED is not only unwarranted but reflects a disturbing trend of investigative overreach that undermines the very foundation of the rule of law," the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association said in a 16 June statement. It stressed that Datar, a senior member of the bar, had consistently upheld the highest standards of legal ethics.
The Bombay Bar Association termed the summons a 'direct attack on the legal community as a whole." It cautioned that such actions—even if withdrawn—could have a chilling effect on advocates engaged in complex corporate cases.
The Delhi High Court Bar Association, in its 18 June resolution, called the move a breach of legal sanctity and said, 'If legal opinions are treated as evidence of complicity, no lawyer will ever be able to advise a client without fear."
The bar warned that summoning lawyers over opinions rendered in good faith sets a dangerous precedent.
Why does this controversy raise deeper concerns?
Legal experts said the episode could alter how legal advice is given in sensitive regulatory and corporate matters.
'Encroaching on the confidentiality of legal opinions in high-profile corporate cases could undermine the trust essential for effective legal defence and advice," said Yatharth Rohila, advocate and partner at Aeddhaas Legal. 'This could discourage companies and their legal counsel from seeking or providing candid opinions, fearing exposure or misuse."
Also Read | Mint Explainer: Why did Sebi issue notice to Rashmi Saluja, Religare board?
'This development may influence how lawyers approach such matters. While statutes provide protection, the prospect of being summoned could affect the dynamics of legal consultation," noted Himanshu Vidhani, a partner at Chandhiok & Mahajan.
Alay Razvi, managing partner at Accord Juris, added that even if legal opinions themselves aren't sought, demands for details such as dates, payments or communications can still strike at the heart of legal privilege. The ED has broad powers but using them against legal professionals without clear allegations raises serious concerns, he said.
What are the legal protections for lawyer-client privilege in India?
Indian law strongly protects lawyer-client confidentiality under Sections 126-129 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Advocates cannot disclose client communications, legal advice or confidential documents.
This protection extends to legal staff and remains intact even if the client testifies. However, privilege does not apply if the communication furthers a crime or fraud, is shared with third parties, is waived by the client, or relates to disputes between lawyer and client.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
44 minutes ago
- Economic Times
ED makes first arrest in loan fraud case linked to Anil Ambani
New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) late Friday evening arrested the managing director of an Odisha-based company - its first arrest in an alleged bank loan fraud case involving the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG). Partha Sarathi Biswal, MD of Biswal Tradelink Pvt Ltd (BTPL), is accused of arranging a fake bank guarantee of ₹68 crore for an ADAG firm. According to the ED, its investigation has revealed that BTPL fraudulently arranged and submitted the fake bank guarantee along with forged SBI endorsements and fabricated confirmations on behalf of Reliance Nu Bess Ltd for a tender floated by Solar Energy Corporation of India Ltd (SECI). For this, BTPL received ₹5.40 crore from Reliance Nu Bess' parent, Reliance Power Ltd, ED has ED carried out searches against Biswal Tradelink on Friday. Agency sources said the evidence gathered by ED confirmed the use of fake documents in the name of certain banks and fake email IDs in the name of SBI."Probe reveals BTPL, a small company incorporated in 2019, maintained multiple undisclosed bank accounts and carried out transactions disproportionate to its declared turnover. Many violations of the Companies Act are found," the probe agency said in a news release on Saturday. Statutory records such as books of accounts and shareholders' registers were not found at the registered address, it said, adding: " Dummy directors are found to be used just to sign the documents."At least seven undisclosed bank accounts of the company were found and "proceeds of crime, of crores of rupees, have been traced to these accounts", it claimed. Biswal was produced before a Delhi court, which sent him to ED's custody till August 6. ET was the first to report on Friday that the ED had summoned Anil Ambani for questioning in connection with its investigation into the ₹17,000 crore alleged loan fraud case. Ambani has been asked to appear before the agency on August 5. According to the Enforcement Directorat, Biswal Tradelink ran a racket that issued fake bank guarantees to business groups. As per the agency, the Delhi Police filed the first information report in the case based on a Reliance Nu Bess company, accusing Biswal Tradelink of cheating it by promising to arrange bank guarantees for a fee and then providing a fake bank guarantee. According to the ED, Reliance Nu Bess wrongly claimed that it was cheated. "Documentary evidence reveals that apparently the two parties acted in collusion. The directors of Biswal Tradelink were found to be previous directors of Reliance group," a senior official had told ET.A statement issued by the Reliance Group on Friday said: "The company and its subsidiaries acted bonafidely and have been a victim of fraud, forgery and cheating conspiracy. The company has made due disclosure on this to the stock exchanges on November 7, 2024," it further said "a criminal complaint in this regard has already been lodged with the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police against the third party on October 16, 2024" and that the "due process of law will follow".
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
ED arrests MD of Biswal Tradelink in fake bank guarantee case
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has arrested Partha Sarathi Biswal, managing director of Biswal Tradelink Private Limited (BTPL), in connection with an alleged fake bank guarantee case. The arrest was made following searches in Bhubaneswar and Kolkata. The probe is based on a first information report registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi police, BTPL, its directors, and others, for allegedly providing a fake bank guarantee, which was purportedly submitted to Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited (SECI). 'In a related matter, evidence seized earlier during searches on July 24 in the case of Anil Ambani group companies has direct linkage with the present investigation. A bank guarantee of ₹68.2 crore submitted to Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited (SECI) on behalf of Reliance NU BESS Limited/Maharashtra Energy Generation Limited has been established as fake,' an official had earlier alleged. According to the agency, BTPL fraudulently arranged and submitted fake bank guarantees of ₹68.2 crore along with forged SBI endorsements and fabricated confirmations for a SECI tender. 'For providing this bank guarantee, ₹5.40 crore has been received by BTPL from Reliance Power Limited,' the agency alleged. Multiple accounts 'Evidence confirms the use of fake documents in the name of certain banks and fake email IDs in the name of the SBI. The probe reveals that BTPL, a small company incorporated in 2019, maintained multiple undisclosed bank accounts and carried out transactions disproportionate to its declared turnover,' it said. The ED is alleged to have detected many violations of the Companies Act. Dummy directors were used just to sign documents. At least seven undisclosed bank accounts of the company have been found, according to the agency sources.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
ED makes first arrest in loan fraud case linked to Anil Ambani
New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) late Friday evening arrested the managing director of an Odisha-based company - its first arrest in an alleged bank loan fraud case involving the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG). Partha Sarathi Biswal, MD of Biswal Tradelink Pvt Ltd (BTPL), is accused of arranging a fake bank guarantee of ₹68 crore for an ADAG firm. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Others Product Management Data Science others Healthcare MBA PGDM Public Policy Leadership Project Management Finance Operations Management Management Cybersecurity healthcare Design Thinking Artificial Intelligence Data Analytics Degree CXO MCA Technology Digital Marketing Data Science Skills you'll gain: Duration: 9 months IIM Lucknow SEPO - IIML CHRO India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 28 Weeks MICA CERT-MICA SBMPR Async India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 16 Weeks Indian School of Business CERT-ISB Transforming HR with Analytics & AI India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India Starts on undefined Get Details According to the ED, its investigation has revealed that BTPL fraudulently arranged and submitted the fake bank guarantee along with forged SBI endorsements and fabricated confirmations on behalf of Reliance Nu Bess Ltd for a tender floated by Solar Energy Corporation of India Ltd (SECI). For this, BTPL received ₹5.40 crore from Reliance Nu Bess' parent, Reliance Power Ltd , ED has alleged. The ED carried out searches against Biswal Tradelink on Friday. Agency sources said the evidence gathered by ED confirmed the use of fake documents in the name of certain banks and fake email IDs in the name of SBI. "Probe reveals BTPL, a small company incorporated in 2019, maintained multiple undisclosed bank accounts and carried out transactions disproportionate to its declared turnover. Many violations of the Companies Act are found," the probe agency said in a news release on Saturday. Statutory records such as books of accounts and shareholders' registers were not found at the registered address, it said, adding: " Live Events Dummy directors are found to be used just to sign the documents." At least seven undisclosed bank accounts of the company were found and "proceeds of crime, of crores of rupees, have been traced to these accounts", it claimed. Biswal was produced before a Delhi court, which sent him to ED's custody till August 6. ET was the first to report on Friday that the ED had summoned Anil Ambani for questioning in connection with its investigation into the ₹17,000 crore alleged loan fraud case. Ambani has been asked to appear before the agency on August 5. According to the Enforcement Directorat, Biswal Tradelink ran a racket that issued fake bank guarantees to business groups. As per the agency, the Delhi Police filed the first information report in the case based on a Reliance Nu Bess company, accusing Biswal Tradelink of cheating it by promising to arrange bank guarantees for a fee and then providing a fake bank guarantee. According to the ED, Reliance Nu Bess wrongly claimed that it was cheated. "Documentary evidence reveals that apparently the two parties acted in collusion. The directors of Biswal Tradelink were found to be previous directors of Reliance group," a senior official had told ET. A statement issued by the Reliance Group on Friday said: "The company and its subsidiaries acted bonafidely and have been a victim of fraud, forgery and cheating conspiracy. The company has made due disclosure on this to the stock exchanges on November 7, 2024," it said. It further said "a criminal complaint in this regard has already been lodged with the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police against the third party on October 16, 2024" and that the "due process of law will follow".
