ED bars summons to advocates, exceptions need director's approval under law

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Friday issued a circular instructing its field formations not to issue summons to any advocate in violation of Section 132 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. This section states that no advocate, at any point of time, should disclose any communication made to him without the client's consent.

The circular mandates that any summons under the exceptions to this provision require prior approval from the Director of the Enforcement Directorate.

This comes amid the probe agency's investigation into a money laundering case involving Care Health Insurance Ltd (CHIL) concerning the issuance of Employee Stock Options (ESOPs) at significantly undervalued prices.

The case centres around the Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) issued on May 1, 2022, which were reportedly priced much lower than market value. This issuance allegedly took place despite a formal rejection of the ESOP proposal by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI).

As part of the ongoing probe, the ED summoned Pratap Venugopal, an independent director of CHIL, to ascertain the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the ESOPs and the board's discussions following IRDAI’s rejection. However, given that Venugopal is a senior advocate practicing in the Supreme Court, the summons issued to him has now been withdrawn.

The ED said that any documents required from him in his capacity as an independent director will be requested via email.

On July 23 last year, the IRDAI directed CHIL to revoke or cancel any ESOPs that remain unallotted. In addition, the regulator imposed a penalty of Rs 1 crore on CHIL for non-compliance with its directives.