P SANKARAN Vs. AMBULAKSHAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant before the Trial Court is the petitioner. The allegation made by him in the complaint is that the accused committed an offence under S.500 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint was filed through his advocate Sri. T.R. Raman Pillai. Prior to the filing of that Sri. Raman Pillai issued a notice on behalf of the complainant, intimating the accused that appropriate legal steps including civil action for realising damages and criminal action for redressal of grievances of complainant will be resorted to.

(2.) Complaint has been entertained by the learned Magistrate. Summons was issued to the accused. On the side of the complainant five witnesses were examined. Defence examined D.W.1. Thereafter accused requested the court to issue witness summons to the complainant's advocate Sri. T.R. Raman Pillai to appear and to give evidence for the defence. Sri. Raman Pillai filed a petition stating that his presence in pursuance of the summons and his examination on oath may be dispensed with. He pointed out that notice issued by him and produced by the accused in the case may be accepted as an exhibit for defence and that he need not be examined to prove the same. Learned Magistrate dismissed that petition stating:-

(3.) Under S.126 of the Evidence Act no advocate shall be permitted to disclose any communication made to him in the course of and for the purpose of his duties as an advocate, unless his client expressly consents so to do. Nor can an advocate be compelled to state the contents of any document which he became acquainted with in the course of his professional employment. This protection will not extend to communications made in furtherance of any illegal purpose and to facts observed by him during his employment evidencing the commission of any crime or fraud. When an advocate is professionally engaged by a client, all communications which pass between them in the course and for the purpose of the employment are privileged and the advocate cannot be permitted to disclose them. Such a statement, even if volunteered by the counsel, is inadmissible in evidence.