Senior advocates Pratap Venugopal and Arvind Datar under fire from a legal fraternity on their summons in relation to a case, in which they had given legal advice, the Enforcement Directorate said on Friday that it had directed the area structures that it was not to issue a compilation with the confluence with the confluence to any advocate for recruitment.
Any exception requires the issue of summons “only will be issued with the pre -approval of the director, Ed”, the investigating agency said in a statement to the press.
The summons of ED not only criticized Datar and Venugopal, but also questioned whether such summons could dilute the Attorney-client privilege. In a case of alleged money laundering, lawyers were called under Section 50 of the Money Laundering Act (PMLA) prevention.
It is learned that Datar wrote to the agency, expressed his inability to respond to the summons citing the Attorney-client privilege. Sources in ED told The Indian Express The summons for the Datar was “finished” and no fresh summons was released.
Venugopal received a communication from the ED, clarifying that the summons for June 24 was “withdrawn”.
Non-transportation of summons by ED is a crime under PMLA. However, lawyers are protected under clear laws from issuing statements or being forced to testify against their customers.
Chairman of Advocate Vipin Nair, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Cord AssociationWritten to the Chief Justice of India Bra Gawai, he urged to take action against Su Motu against Ed.
The story continues below this advertisement
“These actions, by the ED, we believe, pose a serious threat to the amount of an impenetrable crime of the Holy Advocate-client privilege, and the autonomy and fearless functioning of the advocates. Such unwanted and strong measures have been determined against the senior members of the bar for discharge of professional duties, which have been prescribed in a dangerous form.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) also condemned the ED summons to Venugopal and Datar, stating that the action “reflects a disturbing tendency, the very foundation of the legal profession reduces the freedom of striking and bar” and “an illegal, perverted and intensity use of the state power also reflects”.
A statement issued by Advocate Pragya Baghel said that “the Executive Committee … SCBA is unanimously resolved and expresses his deep pain, anxiety and inequality, which condemns the action taken by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and issues notice to Shri Pratap Venugopal, services for services, senior advocates and SCBA members.
On Friday, in his statement to the press, Ed said, “The Mumbai branch of ED is conducting a money-laundering check, alleging that on May 1, 2022, the shares of M/S Care Health Insurance Limited (Chil) were released at a very low price, which is in turn in turn of the insurance regulator and development authority.”
The story continues below this advertisement
“As part of the investigation, a summons was issued to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, an independent director of Chil, to understand the circumstances under which the company issued the ESOP despite its rejection by Irdai and discussed in the Chil Board later. A fine of Rs 1 crore on Chil for non-compliance with regulatory instructions,” Ed said.
“Given the fact that Shri Pratap Venugopal is a senior advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the summons issued to him has been withdrawn and he has also been communicated. In the said communication, in the said communication, it is also said that if any document will be required as an independent director of chill in his capacity, it will be submitted by email.
“In addition, the ED has also issued a spherical for the guidance of the region structures that no summon will be issued to any lawyer in violation of Section 132 of the Indian Witness Adhinam, 2023. Also, if any summons needs to be issued, that too.
– With sure input
,
