The Bombay Bar Association (BBA) has sounded a sharp alarm against the Enforcement Directorate (ED), decrying what it calls an “assault on the legal fraternity.” The outrage stems from ED summons served to Senior Advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal — not for wrongdoing, but for legal opinions given in the line of duty.
The controversy centers around a ₹250 crore Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) granted by Care Health Insurance to former Religare Enterprises chairperson Rashmi Saluja. Datar had signed off on the ESOP with a legal opinion, and Venugopal had acted as Advocate-on-Record. Both now found themselves staring at the ED’s scrutiny — until the agency, rattled by nationwide backlash, quietly retracted the summons.
That, however, wasn’t enough to cool the temperature in legal circles.
In a strongly worded resolution, the BBA called the ED’s move “a direct attack on the legal community as a whole.” The Association warned that the move strikes at the very foundation of protections guaranteed to advocates, particularly under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — a law that shields confidential exchanges between lawyers and their clients.
“This is not just about two lawyers,” the BBA asserted. “It’s about the ability of every advocate to perform their professional duties without fear of State retaliation.”
The uproar pushed the ED into damage-control mode. The agency released a circular instructing all its field units to avoid issuing summons to advocates except under strict statutory exceptions — and only with approval from the ED’s Director.
But the Bar is not ready to forgive and forget.
The BBA’s resolution serves as a stark reminder: when enforcement agencies begin prying into privileged legal advice, they don’t just undermine a lawyer — they jeopardize the rule of law itself.
