Delhi HC Stays CBI Summons to Advocate Sachin Bajpai, Says Lawyers Cannot Be Treated as Suspects for Discharging Professional Duties [Read Judgment]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday (December 19) stayed a summons issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to advocate Sachin Bajpai, expressing serious concern over the manner in which investigating agencies were summoning lawyers for acts performed in the course of professional representation.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while passing the interim order, stayed the notice issued to the advocate and directed the Investigating Officer to remain personally present before the Court on the next date of hearing. During the hearing, the Court orally observed, “This is just not done. This way, lawyers won’t be able to work,” emphasising that such practices strike at the core of the independence of the legal profession.

The case arose after the petitioner-advocate was approached for legal assistance by a director of Lord Mahavira Services India Private Limited following the registration of an FIR alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act, 2000. Acting on his client’s instructions, the advocate sent an email to the CBI on December 15, enclosing documents and information sought by the agency. Subsequently, on December 17, the advocate successfully secured anticipatory bail for his client.

However, on December 19, the CBI issued a notice to the advocate under Sections 94 and 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, requiring him to appear before the agency, produce certified copies of documents, and have his statement recorded. Challenging the notice before the High Court, the advocate contended that the summons was arbitrary, amounted to harassment, and interfered with the administration of justice.

The plea further alleged that the investigating agency had earlier unlawfully detained and mistreated a staff member of the company when he attempted to cooperate with the investigation by submitting documents, and that the present summons formed part of a pattern of intimidation. It was argued that permitting such notices would set a dangerous precedent, whereby advocates could be routinely summoned or coerced merely for representing clients, thereby chilling the right to legal representation.

The High Court underscored that advocates cannot be treated as suspects or compelled to appear before investigating agencies solely on account of professional acts undertaken on behalf of their clients, and that such actions have serious implications for lawyer-client privilege and the functioning of the justice system.

The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocates Mohit Mathur and Sandeep Sharma, while the CBI was represented by advocate Ripu Daman Bhardwaj. The matter has been listed for further hearing on December 23.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner (Sachin Bajpai): Senior Advocates Mohit Mathur and Sandeep Sharma, along with Advocates Nitesh Mehra, Gaurav Bhardwaj, Ashish Sareen, Kumar Kshitij, Anurag Mishra, Adarsh Ratnesh, Somi Sharma, and Utkarsh Dwivedi
For the CBI: Advocate Ripu Daman Bhardwaj

Case Title: Sachin Bajpai v. Union of India & Ors.

[Read Judgment]