Delhi High Court Allows inspection of Seized Advocate’s CPU Amid GST Investigation

The writ proceedings concern a dispute arising from the seizure and inspection of the petitioner’s computer CPU by the GST Department during an investigation into M/s Martkarma Technologies Pvt. Ltd., a gaming company that had allegedly engaged him for legal and professional services. In earlier orders, the Court had laid down strict safeguards to protect attorney-client confidentiality, permitting examination of the CPU only in the presence of the petitioner, his representatives, and technical officers of the Delhi High Court. Cloning of the hard drive was completed, and cloned copies were handed over to the petitioner. The petitioner invoked privilege, while the GST Department asserted that the court’s earlier directions mandated their disclosure.

The GST Department later applied Section 151 CPC seeking permission for a full forensic parsing of the CPU image at the DG-GSTI/NFSU forensic laboratory, stating that the earlier two-day inspection allowed by the Court permitted only partial parsing. The Department has also placed an affidavit asserting that statements of employees and officials of Martkarma suggest the petitioner’s deeper involvement, including alleged revenue sharing. The petitioner disputes these allegations and seeks time to reply. The Local Commissioners’ report submitted by senior IT officials of the High Court recorded disputes about certain folders, hashed data copies, and the petitioner’s refusal to release some Martkarma-related emails.

Main Issue: Whether further forensic parsing of the petitioner’s seized CPU should be permitted, and under what safeguards, given the conflict between investigative requirements and attorney-client privilege.

HC’s Ruling: The Hon’ble Court permitted limited further parsing of the CPU data, emphasising that its earlier intention was to ensure full availability of relevant material to both sides while maintaining strict procedural safeguards. Noting that only partial inspection could be completed earlier, the Court allowed the parsing to be conducted at the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, National Forensic Sciences University (MHA) laboratory, under the supervision of two senior Delhi High Court IT officials acting as Local Commissioners, along with two representatives each from the petitioner and the GST Department. All data, whether objected to or not, is to be parsed to avoid technical delays, with objections to be heard later. A freshly parsed copy must be supplied to the petitioner, while another copy will remain with the local commissioners.

The Court fixed strict timelines, limiting daily parsing to six hours and scheduling the exercise between 17 and 25 November 2025, with Commissioners’ fees shared equally by both parties. It directed that remand applications linked to the Martkarma investigation be brought on record and that the unredacted affidavit be submitted in a sealed cover. Interim protection granted earlier continues, and the matter is listed for further hearing on 4 December 2025, when the Court will also consider the Supreme Court’s recent judgment on summoning advocates during investigations.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below