Back
K. V. VISWANATHAN, N. KOTISWAR SINGH
Ashwinkumar Govindbhai Prajapati – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This special leave petition raises a question of grave public importance. The question is whether at all and if so under what circumstances can the Investigating Agencies directly issue summon to question a counsel who is appearing for a party in a given case. The matter arises this way. The petitioner is a practicing Advocate having enrolled in 1997. He regularly appears and practiced before all the Courts across the State of Gujarat. The petitioner is also the President of Vastral Advocates Association in Gujarat.
2. It appears that on 24.06.2024 an agreement was executed between one Parmar Kamleshkumar Amratlal and one Panchal Princekumar Bhavanishankar pertaining to a loan transaction. It further transpires that on 13.02.2025 an FIR bearing No.11191037250276 of 2025 was lodged at Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad, Gujarat under Sections 296(b) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 40, 42(a), 42(d) and 42(e) of Gujarat Money-Lenders Act, 2011 as well as under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In respect of the said FIR, Panchal Princekumar Bhavanishankar was arrested on 25.02.20
The autonomy of the legal profession must be protected against undue interference by investigating agencies, ensuring advocates can perform their duties without fear of summons.
Police cannot summon an advocate in their professional capacity, as it infringes on client confidentiality and legal representation rights.
An Advocate cannot be summoned under Section 160 of the Cr.P.C. without a valid legal basis, protecting attorney-client confidentiality unless evidence of illegal activity exists.
The concerned person has remedies under the Cr.P.C. and can bring to the notice of the concerned Court the safeguards and provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, including those relating to privileged....
Existing procedural laws on search warrants are sufficient to protect advocates’ rights; blanket procedures cannot be imposed via Public Interest Litigation.
The court affirmed that notices issued under Section 179 of the BNSS are valid for investigative purposes and not subject to challenge if statutory provisions are followed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
