Mumbai: In a significant ruling protecting the independent discharge of professional duties by legal practitioners, the Bombay High Court has observed that criminal liability cannot be foisted upon an advocate merely for rendering an alleged wrong legal advice or opinion. The Single Judge Bench of Justice Sandesh D. Patil made this observation while hearing a criminal application filed by a practicing advocate seeking protection against criminal proceedings invoking penal provisions of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy.
Background of the Case:
The applicant, a practicing advocate, approached the High Court seeking to stall criminal proceedings initiated against him. Appearing for the applicant, the counsel submitted that the advocate had merely discharged his professional obligations by rendering a legal opinion in the matter. It was strongly contended that criminal liability could not be legally fastened onto a counsel simply because the advice rendered is alleged to be erroneous or disputed by parties.
To substantiate these arguments, the applicant’s legal team placed heavy reliance on authoritative judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court, specifically citing CBI v. K. Narayana Rao, (2012) 9 SCC 512, and Surendra Nath Pandey v. State of Bihar, (2020) 18 SCC 730, which deal with the protection of professionals from malicious or misplaced criminal prosecutions arising out of bona fide professional duties.
Arguments and Court Directions:
During the course of the hearing, the counsel representing Respondent No. 2 sought time from the bench to file a formal affidavit-in-reply to the application. Acceding to the request for time, the Court directed that the matter be adjourned and stood over to July 17, 2026.
Pending further detailed consideration and hearing of the matter, the High Court granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause “b”. However, the bench explicitly clarified that the protection granted through the ad-interim order is restricted strictly qua the applicant-advocate.
Broader Legal Implications:
Legal experts have noted that this interim development reinforces the essential safeguards required for the legal fraternity. Advocates act as officers of the court, and their ability to freely, fearlessly, and independently evaluate legal issues and tender opinions to clients is foundational to the administration of justice. Exposing professionals to the threat of criminal prosecution for advisory opinions risks crippling the legal process and intimidating counsel from performing their duties without apprehension. The upcoming hearings are anticipated to further crystallize the boundaries of professional immunity against criminal process under Maharashtra’s judicial oversight
