New Delhi, Jul 13 (PTI) The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Monday a suo motu case over the issue of investigation agencies summoning lawyers who offer opinions to parties and represent them in cases.

A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria will hear the matter.

The case comes in the wake of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoning senior lawyers Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal.

However, on June 20, the ED directed its investigating officers not to issue summons to any advocate in money laundering investigations being carried out against their clients, adding that an exception to this rule can only be made after "approval" by the agency's director.

The central probe agency, tasked with combating money laundering crimes, issued the circular for the guidance of its field formations, stating that "no summons" should be issued to any advocate in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023.

"Further, if any summons needs to be issued under the exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 132 of the BSA, 2023, the same shall be issued only with the prior approval of the director, ED," the agency said.

The counsel had offered legal advice to Care Health Insurance Limited on the employee stock ownership plan given to Rashmi Saluja, former chairperson of Religare Enterprises.

The summons were condemned by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA), calling it a "disturbing trend" that struck at the very foundations of the legal profession.

The bar bodies had urged the chief justice of India to take suo motu cognisance of the matter.

On June 25, a bench of justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh observed the legal profession was an integral component of the process of administration of justice and that allowing police or probe agencies to directly summon lawyers for advising clients would seriously undermine the autonomy of legal profession and was a "direct threat" to the independence of the administration of justice.

The bench had framed a couple of questions in the matter.

"...when an individual has an association with a case only as a lawyer advising the party, could the investigating agency/prosecuting agency/police directly summon the lawyer for questioning?" the bench asked.

Another question read, "Assuming that the investigating agency or prosecuting agency or police have a case that the role of the individual is not merely as a lawyer but something more, even then, should they be directly permitted to summon or should a judicial oversight be prescribed for those exceptional criteria?" The bench said since it was a matter directly impinging on the administration of justice, "to subject a professional... when he is a counsel in the matter... prima facie appears to be untenable, subject to further consideration by the court".

The order came when the top court was hearing a plea of a Gujarat-based advocate, challenging an order of the high court passed on June 12.

The high court in March 2025 refused to quash a notice summoning the lawyer before the police in a case against his client.

The top court, however, directed the state not to summon him till further orders and stayed the operation of the police's notice issued to him.

It said the lawyers engaged in legal practice, apart from their fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution, had certain rights and privileges guaranteed as legal professionals and further as a result of statutory provisions.

Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution deals with the right to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

Underlining the issue as important, the bench called for the assistance of the attorney general, the solicitor general, the chairperson of the Bar Council of India, and the presidents of the SCBA and SCAORA.

The top court had asked the apex court registry to place the case files before the CJI for passing appropriate directions. PTI PKS SKY SKY

Summoning of lawyers questioned; Supreme Court to examine limits on agencies summoning advocates and need for judicial oversight. Supreme Court took suo motu notice of agencies summoning lawyers for advice or representation and will consider limits and safeguards for such summonses. The issue follows ED summons to senior counsel and an ED circular directing that advocates not be summoned in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, with exceptions allowed only upon director approval. The Court posed whether investigators may directly summon counsel acting solely as lawyers and whether judicial oversight is necessary when agencies allege conduct beyond legal representation, and sought input from law officers and bar bodies.