Advocate Privilege Upheld: Searches Require Strict Judicial Safeguards
The Delhi High Court delivered a crucial ruling affirming that searches of an advocate’s office, documents, and electronic devices by GST authorities are permissible only under exceptional circumstances and must be subject to stringent judicial safeguards to protect attorney-client privilege.
Key Points of the Judicial Ruling
- Attorney-Client Privilege is Paramount: The court observed that documents and information exchanged between clients and their lawyers are protected by attorney-client privilege. GST officials cannot access an advocate’s files or electronic devices, and must ensure the advocate’s presence and consent when doing so, to prevent a serious breach of confidentiality for the advocate’s entire client base.
- Conditions for Search and Seizure: While the GST Department alleged the advocate’s active involvement in a client’s business operations and evasion (justifying the search under Section 67 of the CGST Act), the court held that such actions require strong prima facie evidence of the advocate’s direct involvement in the alleged crime.
- Strict Judicial Safeguards Mandated: Given that the advocate’s CPU was seized and accessed without his presence, the court imposed specific safeguards for its inspection, which included:
- Access being allowed only in the presence of the Petitioner and his experts, along with High Court IT officials.
- The entire drive being cloned with a copy provided to the Petitioner.
- Access being strictly limited only to files related to the specific client under investigation, with data of unrelated clients strictly barred from access.
- Bar on Coercive Action: The court directed the GST Department to refrain from taking any coercive action against the advocate pending further orders, underscoring the need for due process in investigations targeting legal professionals.