Consumer Court Directs Amazon, Seller to Pay Rs.4.68 Lakh to Customer as Compensation  ||  MP HC: Pension is a Proprietary Right and Cannot be Withheld unless Grave Misconduct is Proved  ||  HP High Court: ITBP Constable Removal For Affair Disproportionate; Orders Compulsory Retirement  ||  Calcutta High Court: Trade Licence Not Required For Advocates’ Partnership Registration  ||  Supreme Court: Courts Cannot Compel Plaintiffs to Accept Compensation Instead of Injunctions  ||  Delhi HC: Saying “Maro Sale Ko” During a Fight Alone Does Not by Itself Establish Intent to Kill  ||  Delhi HC Ordered Removal of Fake News About Judges’ London Badminton Event, Restrained its Sharing  ||  Bombay HC: Calling Police over Routine Transfers or External Complaints is Misconduct  ||  Delhi HC Upheld EC’s Decision Banning Political Ads in the Delhi Metro During Model Code of Conduct  ||  Delhi HC: In the Telegram Case Entire Social Media Platforms Can Be Blocked U/S 69A of the IT Act    

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