SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
D.N.PATEL, JYOTI SINGH
Nikhil Borwankar – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT) of Delhi – Respondent


Table of Content
1. scope of search warrants against advocates (Para 1 , 2)
2. protection of attorney-client privilege (Para 3)
3. provisions of cr.p.c. and evidence act remedies (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. videography requirements for searches not general (Para 7)
5. dismissal of writ petition (Para 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT

D.N. Patel, CJ. (Oral)

1. Present Public Interest Litigation has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-

    "a) Search warrants be issued against advocates only when investigating officer has obtained prior sanction from Director of Prosecutions (DoP) upon the submission of an appropriate standardised proforma by investigating officer, issued as determined by this Hon'ble Court, submitted through an officer not part of the investigation of the rank of Superintendent of Police, after due deliberation thereupon by the DoP; and

    b) Search warrant be issued against advocates only when Court issuing search warrant concludes in writing that alternative methods of obtaining information have been considered by the investigating agency, and that such efforts could compromise the criminal investigation or prosecution, or could result in the obstruction or destruction of evidence, or would

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top