New Delhi, Aug 12 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday called itself the "custodian" of all citizens in the country as it reserved its decision in a suo motu case on summoning of lawyers by probe agencies while representing clients in cases.

A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria was hearing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta when it remarked, "We are custodian of the entire citizens of the country." The bench went on to reserve its order in the matter.

Mehta during the hearing submitted that lawyers ought to be protected for part of the administration of justice.

On the point of a lawyer's involvement in an offence, the bench said it had already made it clear any digression from their usual practice towards offering advice on tampering or fabrication of evidence would take away their immunity.

Mehta said a lawyer should never be called by the probe agencies for offering professional opinion.

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, who was also appearing in the matter, said the issue was about the access to justice.

He said an FIR was registered against a lawyer recently on the ground that his client said he had not authorised him to given an affidavit which was notarised.

During the hearing, the bench observed it cannot create two classes of lawyers.

Mehta urged the apex court to lay down the law for everyone but bear the country scenario in mind.

"Close for orders," the bench said.

Attorney General R Venkataramani earlier said he had gone through the submissions filed by various bar body in the matter and would file a written note.

The bench asked the lawyers to file their notes within a week.

On July 29, the top court said a person merely acting as a lawyer should not be summoned by the probe agencies for rendering legal opinion to a client under investigation.

The court, however, said if a lawyer was assisting the client in the crime, he could be summoned.

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) represented by senior advocate Vikas Singh and advocate Vipin Nair have made submissions in the matter.

Previously, the apex court observed the Enforcement Directorate was "crossing all limits" and expressed serious concern over the agency summoning advocates for offering legal advice or representing clients during investigations.

It had also called for guidelines on the matter.

The suo motu case came in the wake of the ED summoning senior lawyers Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal.

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

The ED, tasked with combating money laundering crimes, issued a circular for 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, 2023.

The issuing of summons to these advocates was condemned by the SCBA and the SCAORA, which called the move a "disturbing trend" that struck at the very foundations of the legal profession.

The bar bodies had urged the CJI to take suo motu cognisance of the matter. PTI ABA ABA AMK AMK

Protection for lawyers: routine legal representation should not trigger investigative summons, with exceptions for criminal assistance. Summoning of lawyers by investigation agencies is addressed by focusing on limits to such summons: routine legal representation or provision of professional opinion should not ordinarily attract summons, but a lawyer who assists in criminal conduct-including advising on tampering or fabrication of evidence-may be summoned. The court emphasised its role as custodian of citizens, requested submissions from bar bodies, and indicated the need for uniform guidelines and rules applicable to all lawyers while reserving its decision.