Karnataka High Court reserves verdict on plea challenging ED summons to lawyer

The Karnataka High Court on Monday reserved its verdict on a plea filed by Advocate Anil Gowda, a legal consultant to Congress MLA KC Veerendra Puppy, challenging the summons issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case involving allegations of illegal betting and gambling [Anil Gowda H v. Directorate of Enforcement].

The Bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum also directed the ED not to take any hasty action against Gowda until it delivers its judgment on Gowda's plea.

The Court yesterday questioned the ED on the lack of supporting documents to substantiate the allegations against Gowda. The ED's counsel assured the Court that these documents would be submitted.

In his petition, Anil Gowda claimed that the ED is trying to incriminate him out of political vendetta and that the proceedings against him, as well as Congress leader KC Veerendra, are rooted in a bid to muzzle opposition leaders in India.

He alleged that the MLA's recent arrest in this case was a part of this design.

According to Gowda's petition, the ED's proceedings were initiated on the basis of first information reports (FIRs) from the past 10-15 years.

In one such FIR registered in 2011, all the accused were acquitted in 2014, the plea said. Another such FIR registered in 2015 was quashed in 2016. In a third FIR registered in 2016, two other accused pleaded guilty and were convicted. In a fourth FIR registered in 2022, KC Veerendra's name was dropped from the list of accused after the investigation was complete, the plea added.

Gowda contended that although he has not been named in the FIRs or chargesheets, the ED issued summons to him on August 24 seeking his property details, tax records, and information about his legal work for Veerendra.

Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, appearing for Gowda, argued that the ED’s summons was related to Gowda's professional role as a lawyer.

He contended that the legal advise given by Gowda to Veerendra is protected. Reference was also made to the suo motu case pending before the Supreme Court, where the top court is slated to decide on the limits of ED summons to advocates.

The ED was represented by Additional Solicitor General Arvind Kamath and Advocate Madhukar Deshpande.

They argued that ED has not issued summons to Gowda in connection with his role as a lawyer. Rather, he is a partner in several commercial companies, including KC Veerendra's company, the ED said.

There are serious allegations against him of making illegal investment, in connection with which the summons has been issued, the ED said.

During a hearing of the matter on August 29, Deshpande had also argued that lawyers cannot claim exemptions when they are summoned in relation to their possible direct involvement in a crime.

Pahwa, however, had maintained that the ED's summons touched upon Gowda's work as a legal professional.

"They have asked in my capacity as legal advisor.. (so and so queries) only talk about my legal professional relationship with the accused ... I am a lawyer, Hon'ble Supreme Court has protected me (in such matters)," Pahwa said on Friday.

The ED had also pointed out that the August 24 summons had become infructuous, as Gowda had been asked to appear on August 26, which he did not do. The ED would have to issue a fresh summons, the ED's counsel pointed out.