Advocates Cannot Be Summoned for Merely Representing Clients Except under Section 132 BSA

Source: Supreme Court of India 

 Why in News? 

A bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria of the Supreme Court held that investigating agencies cannot summon advocates merely because they appeared for or advised an accused person in a case. 

The Court gave this ruling in case, titled In Re: Summoning Advocates who give legal opinion or represent parties during investigation of cases (2025). 

The judgment stated that such actions by investigating officers infringe the independence of the legal profession and the fundamental rights of advocates and their clients under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. 

What was the Background of the Case? 

• The matter originated when an advocate was summoned by the Ahmedabad Police under Section 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, merely for having represented an accused in a bail matter. 
• The High Court of Gujarat refused to quash the summons, prompting the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognizance of the issue, citing its wide implications for the legal fraternity and the administration of justice. 
• Multiple bar bodies — including the Supreme Court Bar Association, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association, and the Bar Council of India — intervened, asserting that the summons violated the attorney-client privilege guaranteed under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, which mirrors Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 
• It was argued that compelling lawyers to reveal communications with clients not only breaches professional ethics but also undermines the right of an accused to a fair defence. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

The Court analysed Sections 132 to 134 of the BSA, 2023, which deal with professional communications between advocates and their clients, and held that: 

• An advocate cannot be compelled to disclose any communication made to him by a client during professional service, except in limited situations such as when the communication furthers an illegal purpose or reveals a crime or fraud committed after engagement. 
• The privilege of confidentiality continues even after the lawyer-client relationship ends. 
• The right to non-disclosure of professional communication is an extension of the constitutional protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3). 
• Section 179 of the BNSS does not authorize police officers to summon advocates for information regarding their clients. 
• Any such attempt violates the independence of the Bar, the right to legal representation, and the administration of justice. 

The Court further observed that “the power to summon is not the power to destroy”, and cannot be used to interfere with privileged communications while constitutional courts remain functional. 

What is Section 132 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam? 

Section 132: Professional Communications 

 (1) No advocate, shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client's express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his service as such advocate, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional service, or to disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such service: Provided that nothing in this section shall protect from disclosure of—  

(a)any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal purpose;  

(b)any fact observed by any advocate, in the course of his service as such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the commencement of his service. 

(2) It is immaterial whether the attention of such advocate referred to in the proviso to sub-section (1), was or was not directed to such fact by or on behalf of his client. Explanation.—The obligation stated in this section continues after the professional service has ceased. 

(3)The provisions of this section shall apply to interpreters, and the clerks or employees of advocates. 

Important Illustrations of Section 132 of BSA 

(a) A, a client, says to B, an advocate—"I have committed forgery, and I wish you to defend me". As the defence of a man known to be guilty is not a criminal purpose, this communication is protected from disclosure.  

(b)A, a client, says to B, an advocate—"I wish to obtain possession of property by the use of a forged deed on which I request you to sue". This communication, being made in furtherance of a criminal purpose, is not protected from disclosure.  

(c) A, being charged with embezzlement, retains B, an advocate, to defend him. In the course of the proceedings, B observes that an entry has been made in A's account book, charging A with the sum said to have been embezzled, which entry was not in the book at the commencement of his professional service. This being a fact observed by B in the course of his service, showing that a fraud has been committed since the commencement of the proceedings, it is not protected from disclosure.