Delhi HC: Girl Being Friendly on Valentine’s Day Does Not Justify Forced Sexual Activity under POCSO  ||  Delhi HC: Street Vendors Must Maintain Cleanliness and Not Encroach on Public Spaces  ||  Delhi HC: Victim’s Negligence Cannot Bar Compensation in Railway Accident Cases  ||  Jharkhand HC: Pre-1947 Transfers Exempt from Section 46; 45-Year Delay Blocks Restoration  ||  Delhi HC: Mediation Settlement Does Not Remove Criminal Liability But Can be Considered For Bail  ||  Delhi High Court: Newslaundry Acted Maliciously and Showed Intolerance Toward TV Today  ||  SC: New Tree Growth on Land Approved For Development Does Not Qualify it as 'Deemed Forest'  ||  SC: Confiscation Proceedings Can Continue Against Wife of Deceased Public Servant with Illicit Asset  ||  Supreme Court: Strict Procedure Must be Followed under UP Gangsters Act Due to Serious Consequences  ||  Supreme Court: HCs Can Go Beyond FIR to Quash Frivolous or Vexatious Criminal Cases    

SC: In-House Counsel aren’t 'Advocates'; Their Employer Communications Lack S.132 BSA Protection - (03 Nov 2025)

CRIMINAL

Supreme Court held that communications between in-house counsels and employers are not protected under Section 132 BSA, as in-house counsels are not 'advocates' under the Advocates Act, 1961. However, communications with the company’s legal advisor remain protected under Section 134 BSA.

Tags : EMPLOYER   COMMUNICATIONS   PROTECTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved