Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.V. Viswanathan, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.
Ashwinkumar Govindbhai Prajapati – Petitioner
Vs.
State Of Gujarat & Anr. – Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).9334 Of 2025
Decided On : 25-06-2025
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 25.02.2025.
3. The petitioner, on behalf of his client Panchal Princekumar Bhavanishankar, filed regular bail application bearing Criminal Misc. Application No.1399 of 2025 before the learned Sessions Court at Ahmedabad and after due consideration, the Court granted regular bail to the accused.
4. When the matter stood thus, on 24.03.2025, a notice was served on the petitioner under Section 179 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the “BNSS”). The said notice set out the FIR details mentioned above and stated that to know the true details of facts and circumstances, the petitioner was asked to appear at the office of Mr. D.R. Patel, Assistant Commissioner of Police, SC/ST Cell - 2, Ahmedabad City within three days from the date of receipt of the notice. The petitioner challenged the said notice before the High Court by filing R/Special Criminal Application (Quashing) NO.5349/2025. The said notice is extracted hereinbelow:
| “OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE S.C.S.T. Cell-02, Karanj Bhavan, Ahmedabad City, Phone NO.079-25511054 Email-scst-ahd@gujarat.gov.in NOTICE AS PER SECTOIN 179 OF THE B.N.S.S. You are hereby informed by giving this notice that, the complaint is registered on 13/02/2025 at Odhav Police Station, vide Odhav Police Station No.111911037250276/2025 as per Section FIR 296(B), 351(3) of B.N.S.S. and as per section 40, 42(A),(D), E), of the Gujarat Money Laundering Act, 2011 per section 3(2)(5) of the Atrocity Act, and, as the accused Princekumar Bhavanishankar Pancha! Residing at; A-25, Sundarvan Society, Ahmedabad, and Near accused Nirant Chokdi, Princekumar Vastal son of Bhavanishankar Bhagwanji Panchai, Age: 31 years, Occ: Business, residing at House NO. A-25, Sundavrvan Society, Smarajy Tenement, Opp. Avadh Hospital, Metro Pillar NO..139, Native: Nirant Chokdi, Vastral, Ahmedabad, Vilalge Padra, Ta. Sagwada, Dist. Dungarpur (rajastha), the accused of the complainant Kamieshbha Amratbhal Parmar, Age: 41 years, of this matter, and, I am doing the Investigation of the same. In this regard since, it is necessary to know the true details of the facts and circumstances after making your inquiry, therefore, you are hereby Informed to appear at this office within 3 days from the date of receipt of this notice. Date-24/03/2025. Sd/- illegible (D.R. Patel) Assistant Commissioner of Police, S.C.S.T. Cell-02, Ahmedabad city. To Ashwin G. Prajapati (Advocate) Office F.F./3, Marutlnandan Shopping Centre, Copy Daiyr, Mahadev Nagar, Vastral Road, Ahmedabad. Mob. No.99989344114, 9724170600” |
5. By the impugned order, the said pet
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
