Hyderabad, February 17 When an advocate crosses the "Lakshman Rekha" and becomes an active participant in criminal activity, they cannot claim the protection afforded by the attorney-client statute, the Telangana High Court has said.
Delivering judgment on a petition filed by M A Akthar, an advocate who was named as an accused in a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), a High Court bench said that the petitioner's attempt to shield himself behind his professional status as an advocate was a transparent ploy to evade legitimate investigation into his possession and concealment of the proceeds of crime.
"When an advocate crosses the Lakshman Rekha and becomes an active participant in criminal activity, they cannot claim the protection afforded by the attorney-client statute," the bench said in its order dated February 12.
The independence of the legal profession does not translate into a license for advocates to engage in money laundering or to possess the proceeds of crime.
Moreover, the petitioner's challenge to the search and seizure operations on procedural grounds is without merit, it further said.
The petition argued that he was never named as an accused in the FIR or in the final report filed by the police, who had conducted an investigation into an FIR registered at the Maheshwaram Police Station in Telangana regarding government property.
The police closed the FIR, terming the dispute as civil in nature and finding that no criminality was made out.
In the absence of a predicate offence, the registration of the ECIR and continuation of the investigation by the ED are wholly without jurisdiction, arbitrary, and constitute a manifest abuse of the process of law, the petitioner contended.
The ED's lawyers argued that the evidence on record establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the petitioner knowingly facilitated the fraudulent transaction through the arrangement and execution of forged and fabricated documents.
The petitioner received substantial monetary consideration as quid pro quo for his instrumental role in enabling the illegal mutation and subsequent alienation of prohibited government property.