Lawyers can be summoned only under exceptional circumstances: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today delivered its verdict on the issue of summons being issued to advocates by investigating agencies, in cases relating to their clients.

"We don't find a need for additional rules to be formulated...but we have tried to harmonise the existing procedural rules", Justice K Vinod Chandran read out from the judgment today in court.

The bench has said, investigating agencies shall not issue summons to lawyers appearing for accused, and if so, it shall specify the exception under which it has issued the said summons. Digital devices of the advocates concerned shall be produced before a jurisdictional court only, the court has further said.

A CJI Gavai led bench had reserved verdict in the case on August 12 after hearing all parties concerned before it, including the Attorney General and Solicitor General.

During a hearing, while expressing concerns, the CJI had said,"It is privileged communication..even if advice is right or wrong..", the CJI observed at the outset.

Notably, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had told the bench that there was a concentrated effort to create a narrative against a particular institution. Clarifying that he was speaking independently and not on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate, the SG had added, "I am not from any political party..but if a politician is involved in a 3000 crore scam..minor observations creates a wrong impression...".

Supreme Court of India had registered a suo motu case over summons being issued to advocates, in cases relating to their clients, by investigating agencies on July 14.

On June 25th, a bench of Justices KV Vishwanathan and N Kotiswar Singh which was hearing a plea by a lawyer who was summoned by police in Gujarat in relation to a case of his client had placed the issue before the CJI for taking cognizance.

The assistance of the Attorney General for India R Venkataramani, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman, President of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the President of Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) had also been sought by the Supreme Court on the issue.

While granting interim relief to the lawyer who was summoned by the police in Gujarat, the bench had ordered that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for appropriate directions.

In relation to the Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai Zonal office 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, summons were issued to Senior Advocate Pratap Venugopal. As a strong reaction to the ED's summons issued to Venugopal over a legal opinion rendered in the ESOP matter the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) wrote to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice BR Gavai, urging urgent suo motu cognisance of the matter.

The ED then clarified that said summons issued to Venugopal have 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 Venugopal in his capacity as an Independent Director of CHIL, the same will be requested from him to be submitted by email.

SCAORA recently also strongly condemned the ED's move to summon Senior Advocate Arvind Datar in connection with a legal opinion rendered by him in his professional capacity, alleging it constitutes a “disturbing trend of investigative overreach” and an attack on the independence of the legal profession. The bar body described the ED’s action as “unwarranted” and a “misuse of authority”, reflecting a growing tendency to undermine advocates who perform their duties fearlessly and impartially.

Case Title: IN RE : SUMMONING ADVOCATES WHO GIVE LEGAL OPINION OR REPRESENT PARTIES DURING INVESTIGATION OF CASES AND RELATED ISSUES vs.

Judgment Date: October 31, 2025

Bench: CJI Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran