In a major development the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has withdrawn with immediate effect the summons it had issued to Senior Advocate Pratap Venugopal over legal advice proffered by him to a client. This comes after the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA), dashed off a strongly- worded letter to Chief Justice of India, urging the court to take suo motu cognisance of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) summons issued to Senior Advocate Pratap Venugopal.

The summons, dated 18th June, 2025 and received by Venugopal on 19th June, 2025 relates to an investigation into the Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) granted by Care Health Insurance to Rashmi Saluja, former Chairperson of Religare Enterprises. Venugopal had acted as Advocate-on-Record for a legal opinion authored by Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, which supported the issuance of the stock options. Notably, the ED had earlier served a similar notice to Datar, which was subsequently withdrawn.

In its letter dated 20th June, 2025, SCAORA described the ED’s move as a “deeply disquieting development” that threatens the sanctity of lawyer-client confidentiality and the independence of the legal profession. The Association underscored Venugopal’s professional integrity and standing in the legal community, warning that such coercive actions could have a chilling effect on advocates discharging their duties. The SCAORA called upon the Supreme court to step in and protect the constitutional and professional safeguards afforded to lawyers.

Signed by SCAORA President Vipin Nair, the letter urged the Court to:

1. Examine the legality and propriety of issuing summonses to legal professionals
2. Safeguard the constitutional and professional protections afforded to advocates.
3. Lay down guidelines to prevent further erosion of lawyer-client privilege.

“The role of an advocate in offering legal advice is both privileged and protected,” the letter asserted, cautioning that investigative overreach “strikes at the heart of the rule of law.”

The letter concluded by urging the Supreme Court to protect the independence of the Bar and to ensure that executive power was not misused in a manner that compromised the integrity of the legal profession.

The ED’s actions have sparked widespread concern across the legal fraternity. Bar associations in Delhi, Gujarat and Madras have issued resolutions condemning the issuance of summons to both Datar and Venugopal. The Delhi High Court Bar Association termed the move a violation of the right to legal representation, while the Gujarat High Court Advocates Association called for urgent legislative safeguards under the Indian Evidence Act and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. The Madras High Court Advocates Association went a step further, calling the ED’s actions a dangerous precedent and a direct assault on the independence of the Bar.

Source: News