The Supreme Court, in a suo motu proceeding, addressed the misuse of police powers in summoning lawyers during criminal investigations. The case arose after an advocate representing an accused was summoned under Section 179 BNSS, 2023 merely to disclose facts of the case. Recognizing the threat to attorney-client confidentiality, a Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai held that an investigating agency cannot summon a lawyer solely because they represent an accused. Such action violates the attorney-client privilege under Section 132 BSA, a core protection ensuring free communication between client and counsel. The Court clarified that a lawyer may be summoned only if the police possess specific material showing that the communication falls within the statutory exceptions—such as involvement in an illegal act or observing a crime. Even then, the summons must record reasons and must be approved by a Superintendent of Police. The Court also issued safeguards for seizure of digital devices and clarified that in-house counsel are not “advocates” for Section 132 protection. Setting aside the summons, the Court reinforced that police powers cannot undermine legal privilege or the right to fair defence.