The High Court of Delhi received a PIL by Advocate Nikhil Borwankar regarding the implementation of the new legislation on the police who are performing search and seizure in the advocate’s premises.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared on the petitioner’s side stating that the police who perform search and seizure in the advocate’s premises are forcibly snatching the mobile of the Advocate which contains confidential data and conversations of their clients, which is in a draconian manner and is against the rule of law. By criticizing the incident of search and seizure performed by police in advocate’s premises dated 28, December 2020. He seeks to issue a notice to the government on this unduly intimidation of the police. And the plea also states that intimidating the Advocate’s professional digital devices is a grave and egregious violation of the privacy of the private citizen and that too with the member of the bar council who is always engaged with their clients. Hence, pray of the plea is that the issuance of the search warrant must be sanctioned by the director of the prosecution and the warrants issued by the court must have some alternative way to perform such search and seizures in the Advocate’s premises.

The Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma who represented on behalf of the Union of India stated that it is impossible to bring fresh legislation as per the petition. And he also opposed the plea stating that the search and seizure guild lines in according to the different acts. And he also pointed that the petition doesn’t contain any detail regarding whom and where such act of search and seizure took. At least the petition must have some names of the parties to the case. Or however, the national investigation agency and the intelligence bureau have to be parties in this case.

As per the request made by the Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, the court asked to reply to the notice directed to the central government to hear this case further. Until then the court remarked that the court is simply adjourning by awaiting the reply of the central government, by deciding to hear remaining on September 3, 2021.

-Report by AJISHA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *