SC Issues Directions For Producing Advocates' Digital Devices Holding Clients' Info For Probe
The Wire Staff
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
New Delhi: Detailed directions have been issued by the Supreme Court for regulating the production of advocates' documents and digital devices that may contain client information.
Taking suo motu cognisance of the issue of investigating officers issuing summons to advocates in criminal cases, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai, Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice N.V. Anjaria passed the directions on the issue.
While the apex court clarified that documents of a client held by an advocate are not covered by privilege under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), be it in civil or criminal proceedings, but such production must follow strict procedural safeguards, reported LiveLaw.
The court said that if an advocate is directed to produce a document that belongs to the client, it has to be done before the court under Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), read with Section 165 of the BSA, ensuring judicial supervision.
Similarly, in civil proceedings, the production will be governed by Section 165 BSA and Order 16 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Upon production, the Court must hear both the advocate and the client before ruling on objections regarding production or admissibility.
Laying down special safeguards for digital devices, the top court said that in case an investigating officer seeks the production of an advocate's digital device under Section 94 BNSS, the device must be produced only before the jurisdictional court. The court will have to issue a notice to the concerned client concerned and hear both the advocate and the client before allowing discovery from the device. In case objections are overruled, then the device may be examined only in the presence of the advocate and the client. They can seek the assistance of a digital technology expert of their choice.
In the directions issued, the court said that only the information sought and deemed admissible by the court may be disclosed, without compromising the confidentiality of other clients.
The court further said that advocates can be summoned only if the matter fell within the exceptions to attorney-client privilege under Section 132 of the BSA. Prior approval of a superior officer not below the rank of SP is also necessary to issue summons to the advocate, reported LiveLaw.
This article went live on October thirty-first, two thousand twenty five, at fifty-nine minutes past five in the evening.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.