Section 353 of IPC – Offence against Advocates for interfering in CBI search of client’s office

CBI officers had visited the office of the client of the Petitioners- Advocates for search.  On call by the clients, the petitioners had visited the office of their client and asked for the identity of the CBI Officers.  There was exchange of words between the Advocates and the CBI officers.   The Advocates were taken to the police station and the offence was registered.

HELD that a client subjugated to search by law enforcement agencies is bound to call legal Advisor / Advocate for help.  The presence of the Advocates at the office of their client was in fact completely in their professional capacity.  It cannot be alleged that their mere presence at the office and their questioning about identity of CBI Officers would amount to cause any obstruction whatsoever to the CBI to continue with the search operation.

The act of the Petitioners – Advocates and the presence at the incident spot did not lead to stop search operation.

Mere restraint of an official would not amount to the offence under Section 353 of the IPC.  Asking the CBI Officers to show their identity cards is not restraining them from their official duty.  It is not an act of assault or criminal force.

Costs of Rs.15,000/- to each of the Petitioners- Advocates was granted to send a clear message to the law enforcement agencies to ensure that legal provisions are not misused by them so as to cause irreparable hardship and sufferance to the citizens of this country.

Judgment dated 21.11.2024 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Revision Application No.559 of 2024 of Gobindram Daryanumal Talreja and others   Vs. The State of Maharashtra