Prayagraj, Jul 3 In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court has observed that a fee remitted to an advocate from a client accused of a crime for his professional duties cannot be classified as "proceeds of crime" unless the advocate himself is involved in a criminal offence.
A two-judge bench comprising Justices J J Munir and Arun Kumar was hearing a writ petition filed by advocate Ayush Bajpai, who challenged the freezing of his bank account on the instructions of the Uttar Pradesh Police's Cyber Cell over alleged fraudulent transactions.
He argued that the amount credited to his account was the professional fee he received from his client.
The bench noted that in the present case, the bank account of the petitioner had modest credits -- Rs 20,000 on March 18, Rs 3,700 on April 23 and two credits of Rs 3,700 each on April 23. The total balance in the account was Rs 1,03,071.
Taking a serious view of the matter, the bench asked the additional chief secretary (Home) to file an affidavit.
"Let the additional chief secretary (Home), UP... file his own affidavit within two weeks on the issue indicating how seizure of an advocate's account made by sundry officers of the police is to be dealt with so as not to interfere with dispensation of justice itself in courts."
It fixed the next hearing in the matter on July 17.
The bench said that an advocate can be paid his fee by the government, by a respectable man or a man who is not so respectable.
The court drew a clear distinction between money derived from illegal activities and the legitimate remuneration earned by a lawyer for discharging his statutory duties.
"An advocate could be defending an accused who is indeed involved in a big scam or fraud, but when fee is remitted by such an accused to his learned counsel in account, the money cannot be said to be proceeds of crime," it said.
The bench said that it is the "lawful remuneration" of the learned counsel, which would be duly earned after the engagement is discharged.
"If for the remittance of any sum of money, an advocate's account is frozen, describing it as a cyber fraud or the money as proceeds of a cyber fraud or other crime, it could become very difficult for advocates to discharge their professional duties under the Advocates Act. The functioning of the court itself would be embarrassed," the bench remarked.
The bench, however, clarified that it would be quite a different matter if an advocate is involved in a criminal offence and has credits in his account that are proceeds of his crime.
Ayush Bajpai v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2933178
