Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2022 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 382 - HC - Money LaunderingAssignment of a counsel who shall be within visible distance of the accused but not audible distance during interrogation - If the respondent has a right of presence of his lawyer during recording of his statements under Section 50 of PMLA, at a safe distance from him from where the lawyer can see the accused and not hear him? - HELD THAT:- Since there is neither any FIR nor a complaint against the respondent thus he cannot as a matter of right claim to have the presence of his lawyers during the course of recording of his statement per Ramesh Chander Metra [1968 (10) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT] and Anant Brahmchari [2012 (3) TMI 695 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. Even otherwise, admittedly, his entire recording of statement is videographed and audiographed which certainly would dispel the apprehension of any coercion, threat to the respondent. Even otherwise, in Sandeep Jain [2019 (12) TMI 1247 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the Division Bench of this Court held the apprehension of coercive measures being employed need to be real and like so that the principle of presence of an advocate, at visible, but not audible distance be applied. Application disposed off.
|