The Supreme Court Today (Aug 1) refused to cancel criminal proceedings against a lawyer accused of conspiracy. The Court said lawyers cannot escape trial just because of their profession and even phone calls may be treated as evidence.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India today refused to cancel the criminal case against a lawyer who was accused of working together with the main accused in a criminal matter.
A Bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and PB Varale clearly stated that lawyers cannot demand immunity from criminal prosecution only because they belong to the legal profession.
The Court also rejected the submission that phone conversations between a lawyer and an accused person cannot form the basis of criminal charges when no direct evidence is available.
Justice Mithal explained,
“If during probe any incriminating material comes on record, even against a lawyer, then it has to go on. Even phone conversations are covered by it.”
The counsel for the petitioner argued that being in contact with an accused over phone should not by itself attract criminal liability.
He submitted,
“Just because the lawyer had a conversation with the accused, he cannot be impleaded. There has to be direct evidence. Contacting on phone cannot be the basis.”
In reply to this, Justice Mithal raised a hypothetical example and asked,
“That has to be seen at trial, right? You have been advising them and appear to be a criminal mastermind as to how the crime has to be committed. As a civil lawyer there can be rent dispute… now if you advise the landlord on phone that if the tenant is not vacating, you can have a truck driver mow down the tenant…”
When the lawyer pointed out that no such allegation was made in the present case, the Court did not step back and clarified that such matters have to be examined only during the trial.
The Bench remarked,
“Narration will be there when evidence is recorded. Always call client to chamber and advise, and not on phone. Now lawyers will be careful.”
With these strong observations, the Supreme Court dismissed the lawyer’s petition and allowed the trial proceedings to continue further.
CASE TITLE:
Vinod vs State of Rajasthan.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Evidence in Criminal Cases
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
