Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 724 - HC - CustomsSeeking permission of presence of the advocate with the petitioner while interrogating/enquiry - seeking direction to conduct the interrogation promptly without undue delay and during the office hours - HELD THAT:- There are specific allegations made by the petitioners that their business associate, Mr. Rajesh Jain had been beaten and threatened by the respondent in the course of investigation for the purpose of recording the statement as per their wishes. In light of these serious allegations made by their business associate, the petitioners apprehend that they may, too, be physically assaulted or manhandled. Since, the allegations levelled by the business associate of the petitioners raise a reasonable apprehension on the part of the petitioners. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in VIJAY SAJNANI & ANR. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. [2012 (4) TMI 706 - SUPREME COURT] has held that it is directed that the petitioners' advocate should be allowed to be present during the interrogation of the petitioners. He/they should be made to sit at a distance beyond hearing range, but within visible distance and the lawyer must be prepared to be present whenever the petitioners are called upon to attend such interrogation. Accordingly, the present writ petitions are allowed with direction to the appropriate authority that the petitioners would be interrogated in presence of an Advocate at a visible, but not audible distance in relation to the interrogation by the Officers of DRI in accordance with the direction given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijay Sajnani - It is also directed that the proceedings be video-graphed in terms of the orders passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in RAJINDER ARORA AND ORS. VERSUS UOI AND ORS. [2010 (12) TMI 1254 - SUPREME COURT]. Petition disposed off.
|