Yes. Attorney-client privilege is recognized under Indian law. It is primarily governed by the BSA, the Advocates Act and the BCI Rules, which set out the ethical duties of advocates, including the obligation to maintain client confidentiality. An "advocate" in this context refers to a person enrolled under the Advocates Act — functionally similar to an attorney, barrister or solicitor in other legal systems.

Attorney-client privilege applies to exchanges between a client and their advocate/attorney that occur during the course of professional engagement and are intended for legal advice. It primarily covers communications related to the following:

• Legal advice or consultation, whether oral or written;
• Preparations made with a view to legal proceedings, including advice given in anticipation of disputes; and
• Documents and materials created during representation, such as correspondence, case strategies, draft pleadings and related notes.

In Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. Prime Displays (P) Ltd. [2002], the Bombay High Court confirmed that legal advice and documents generated in anticipation of litigation are protected. Earlier, in Kalikumar Pal v. Rajkumar Pal [1931], it was emphasized that the protection applies only to communications made under a formal professional relationship and in confidence. Building on these principles, the Supreme Court recently in Aswinkumar Govindbhai Prajapati v. State of Gujarat & Anr [2025] reinforced that the legal profession is an essential part of the justice system, and that directly summoning lawyers, especially those only involved in an advisory capacity, risks compromising both professional privilege and the independence of legal counsel.

However, this protection is not without limits, and it does not cover the following:

• Conversations or documents shared before the advocate is formally engaged;
• Situations where communication is for illegal purposes; and
• Cases where the advocate/attorney becomes aware of criminal acts committed during the course of the engagement.

Under the BSA, individuals generally cannot be forced to disclose confidential discussions with their legal adviser. However, an exception exists if the person becomes a witness in court and disclosure is necessary to clarify their testimony.

The client holds the exclusive right to waive privilege. In corporate matters, this authority lies with the organization itself — not with individual employees. Typically, only those in official positions, such as board members and in-house legal counsel, are empowered to make this decision on the company's behalf.

To maintain privilege, businesses often retain external legal counsel early and explicitly state that internal investigations are being conducted for the purpose of legal advice. This approach strengthens the argument that all resulting communications are legally protected.