The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to quash criminal proceedings against a lawyer accused of being part of a conspiracy in a criminal case, making it clear that legal professionals cannot claim immunity from prosecution simply because of their profession.
A bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice P.B. Varale dismissed the lawyer’s plea, which argued that his phone conversations with the main accused did not justify criminal charges in the absence of any direct evidence. The Court, however, held that even telephonic communication could be relevant during an investigation and could not be brushed aside merely because the individual is a lawyer.
The petitioner’s counsel had submitted that being in contact with an accused person over the phone does not warrant prosecution, especially when there is no explicit evidence linking the lawyer to the alleged offence. The Court disagreed, observing that if, during the course of investigation, material suggesting criminal involvement is found — even against a lawyer — the case must be allowed to proceed.
Justice Mithal, responding to the submissions, pointed out that the nature of the lawyer’s involvement could only be properly assessed during trial. He also suggested that legal advice, particularly in sensitive matters, should be given in person and not casually over the phone, as such communication may raise suspicion or be misconstrued.
When the petitioner’s lawyer clarified that no such allegations had been made in this case, the bench maintained that such factual assessments were part of trial proceedings. The Court noted that evidence would be recorded in due course and legal professionals should exercise caution in how they interact with clients, especially when sensitive issues are involved.
With these observations, the Court dismissed the petition and allowed the trial against the lawyer to continue.
