Delhi High Court Enforces Protocols for Seized CPU Inspection in GST Case

Court Establishes Safeguards for Attorney-Client Privilege During Data Parsing in Puneet Batra Case  

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has set out detailed protocols for inspecting a seized CPU in a case involving Puneet Batra and the Union of India. The matter, which raises critical issues of attorney-client privilege and data confidentiality, was presided over by Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain.

The court's decision, dated November 13, 2025, highlights the need for procedural fairness in the inspection and analysis of data seized from Mr. Batra, who is under investigation by the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Department. The case revolves around allegations that Mr. Batra was more than just a legal advisor to M/s Martkarma Technologies Pvt. Ltd., a gaming company, but was also involved in its operations.

The court has directed that the parsing and analysis of the CPU data be conducted in the presence of representatives from both parties and court-appointed commissioners. The Directorate General of GST Intelligence, National Forensic Sciences University, has been chosen as the venue for this operation, ensuring that the analysis is expedited while maintaining data integrity and confidentiality.

Emphasizing the importance of attorney-client privilege, the court ordered that the inspection of the CPU should occur in the presence of the petitioner and his legal representatives. This measure aims to prevent any breach of confidentiality. The court-appointed commissioners, including senior officials from the IT Department of the Delhi High Court, will oversee the process.

Furthermore, the court has outlined specific procedural steps for the inspection. These include connecting the CPU to peripheral devices to determine the last date of data access and the nature of files accessed. The entire hard drive will be cloned, and the relevant data will be identified and copied for further investigation.

The court has also addressed the financial aspect of the operation, stipulating a fee of Rs. 25,000 per day for each court-appointed commissioner, to be shared equally by the petitioner and the GST Department.

Interim directions related to the inspection and analysis of the CPU data will remain in effect until the next hearing scheduled for December 4, 2025. During this session, further directions will be considered, including the recent Supreme Court judgment on summoning advocates in legal proceedings.

The Delhi High Court's ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to balancing investigative needs with the protection of legal privileges, setting a precedent for handling similar cases in the future.

Bottom Line:

The court deliberated on issues of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality concerning the inspection of a seized CPU, outlining specific procedural safeguards during the parsing and analysis of data while ensuring cooperation between the Petitioner and the GST Department.

Statutory provision(s):  

- Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 151  

- Constitution of India, 1950 Article 226

Puneet Batra v. Union of India, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2809376