In a pointed response, the Allahabad High Court censured the legal counsel of an accused in a high-profile money laundering case for bypassing protocol by directly emailing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) about a pending bail application. The lawyers representing the accused had reached out to the ED’s Investigating Officer, urging him to submit a reply as per the Court’s previous directive—an attempt, they argued, to prevent unnecessary delays.
Justice Samit Gopal took issue with this action, clarifying that a counsel’s role is strictly to represent their client within the bounds of court procedures, without direct interaction with investigative agencies unless explicitly instructed by the Court. “A lawyer’s duty is to represent in court, not to align himself with the client or directly engage with authorities like Investigating Officers,” the judge asserted.
This conduct, which the ED’s counsel had challenged, was highlighted as overstepping professional boundaries. Citing the Bar Council of India’s rules, Justice Gopal stressed that attorneys should not communicate directly with the opposing side outside the courtroom unless sanctioned. Such actions, he noted, infringe upon the decorum expected within judicial proceedings.
The court further emphasized that the appropriate course of action, in case of non-compliance with court orders, would have been to notify the Bench rather than remind the investigating officer through direct correspondence.
Following this admonition, the Court ultimately granted bail to the accused, Padam Singhee, Joint Managing Director of SVOGL Oil Gas & Energy Limited, as it weighed the case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
