Supreme Court Allows Counsel Presence During Interrogation The Supreme Court granted interim directions allowing the petitioners' counsel to be present during their interrogation by custom authorities. The Court ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Supreme Court Allows Counsel Presence During Interrogation
The Supreme Court granted interim directions allowing the petitioners' counsel to be present during their interrogation by custom authorities. The Court reiterated previous orders permitting counsel presence within visible distance but beyond hearing range during the proceedings. Petitioners were directed to apply to custom authorities for similar provisions if desired. The Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and the writ petition, ensuring the petitioners' advocate's presence during interrogation at a distance beyond hearing range but within visible distance.
Issues: Interim directions for counsel presence during interrogation by custom authorities.
Analysis: The Supreme Court addressed the issue of allowing the petitioners' counsel to be present during their interrogation by custom authorities. The Court noted that similar matters had been brought before them previously, where they had directed that the counsel could be present within visible distance but beyond hearing range during the interrogation. In line with those previous orders, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing that in similar cases, if the person(s) summoned under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, wished for similar orders, they could apply to the custom authorities concerned for such provisions. The Court explicitly allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioners' advocate should be permitted to be present during the interrogation. The advocate was to sit at a distance beyond hearing range but within visible distance, and they were required to be present whenever the petitioners were called for interrogation.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court's judgment granted interim directions for the presence of the petitioners' counsel during their interrogation by custom authorities. The Court reiterated its previous orders allowing counsel to be present within visible distance but beyond hearing range during such proceedings. The judgment emphasized that petitioners could apply for similar provisions if they wished for counsel presence during interrogation. The Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and the writ petition, ensuring that the petitioners' advocate could be present during the interrogation, albeit at a distance beyond hearing range but within visible distance.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
