Madras HC stays CCI regulation restricting Advocates’ interaction with clients during DG investigation

The Madras High Court on Friday stayed the Regulation recently introduced by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) which restricted lawyers from interacting with clients during investigations carried out by the Director General..The amendment was introduced last month, ostensibly to allow advocates to accompany parties summoned during an investigation by the Director General (DG) of the CCI. The regulation in question had also conferred on the CCI powers to debar advocates from appearing before it for misconduct..The newly inserted Regulation 46A of the Competition Commission of India (General) Amendment Regulations, 2018 also laid down the following riders:.a) The Advocate shall not be allowed to accompany such person, unless a request in writing accompanied by a Vakalatnama or Power of Attorney is duly submitted to the DG, prior to commencement of the proceedings..b) The Advocate shall not sit in front of the person so summoned..c) The Advocate shall not be at a hearing distance and shall not interact, consult, confer or in any manner communicate with the person, during his examination on oath..Further, sub clause (2) of the new Regulation provides that the CCI may debar advocates from appearing before the Commission, on a complaint by the DG for misconduct..In the aftermath of the ensuing furore among members of the Bar, the Tamil Nadu Advocates’ Association had moved the Madras High Court, challenging these restrictions..The petition filed by the Association has contended that the said amendment is an assault on the nobility and importance attached to advocates. Particular objection has also been made to sub clause (2) of the new Regulation, with the Association contending that is makes a mockery of the Advocates Act, 1961. The petition states,.“… in the name of an amendment in the form of the Regulations 46-A of the Competition Commission of India (General) Amendment Regulations, 2018 the mandatory statutory provisions from Sections 35 to 48 of the Advocate’s Act, 1961, which it is the Parliamentary enactment are violated and it is the settled position of law that no Regulation can violate the mandatory provisions of the Parent Act…“.Prior to this, the Association had already sent a communication to the President of India, the Prime Minister of India and others, urging that action be taken to annul the Regulation in question..Following arguments made by Senior Counsel S Prabhakaran for the Association, the Division Bench of Justices N Kirubakaran and R Pongiappan yesterday issued an interim stay on the CCI Regulation..Prabhakaran had earlier commented that the new Regulation appeared to introduce a form of untouchability. With specific reference to clause (b) of the controversial regulation, he had pointed out,.“Is this not a form of untouchability? This profession is a noble one. How can such a rule be passed without getting approval from the Bar Council of India? It is very unfortunate that these executives are sitting in their ivory towers and passing these kinds of regulations.”.It has been argued that the CCI does not the power to introduce such restrictions, and that the Bar Council’s powers in this regard are being usurped..Apart from the new Regulation, the petition has also questioned whether a person without a judicial background can sit as the Chairperson of the CCI. On this aspect, the petition has also challenged Section 7 of the Competition Act. Further, Section 35 of the Act, which allows certain categories of non-advocates to appear before the Commission, has also been challenged.