The Jharkhand High Court criticised the railway police for summoning a lawyer defending an accused. It said, “Summoning of advocate by investigating officer is disturbing,” and emphasised that client-lawyer communication is privileged under law.
The Jharkhand High Court remarked on the troubling nature of an investigating officer summoning a defense counsel representing an accused individual.
Justice Ananda Sen emphasized that communication between a lawyer and their client is privileged.
The Court stated,
“Summoning of an Advocate, who is defending the accused, by the Investigating Officer, who is investigating the crime, is really disturbing. Any communication between an Advocate and his client, no matter what is the status of his client, is a privileged communication. Whatever he has communicated with the accused, cannot be forced to be divulged before any Investigating Officer,”
Also Read: Can ED Summon Lawyers for Giving Legal Opinions?: Supreme Court to Decide Today
This observation was made while the Court stayed a summons issued by the Railway Protection Force to advocate Agniva Sarkar.
Sarkar was representing an accused in a case related to the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1996.
The summons indicated that Sarkar was needed to provide a statement after one of the accused claimed in a confession that Sarkar had assured them he would help them continue their activities and protect them.
Upon reviewing the case, the Court noted that it appears the summons were issued primarily to obtain privileged information about the communication between Sarkar and his clients.
The Court ordered,
“In the meantime, by way of interim measure, the impugned notice dated 24.7.2025, issued by respondent No. 3, will remain stayed. It is also made clear that respondents will not issue any further notice of similar nature to the petitioner till disposal of this petition,”
Advocate Ajay Kumar Sah represented Sarkar, while Additional Solicitor General Anil Kumar appeared for the Union of India, and Advocate Abhijeet Kumar Singh represented the State of Jharkhand.
Case Title: Agniva Sarkar v The Union of India & Ors
Read Attachment