High Court orders no coercive action, allows advocate presence during interrogation. Videographing directed with costs. Accused not entitled to copy. The High Court ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners in a specific file pending before the Apex Court. The court allowed the ...
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.
High Court orders no coercive action, allows advocate presence during interrogation. Videographing directed with costs. Accused not entitled to copy.
The High Court ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners in a specific file pending before the Apex Court. The court allowed the advocate to accompany the petitioners during interrogation at a visible but not audible distance. It directed the Department to videograph the recording of statements and examination of petitioners and goods, with costs to be borne by the petitioners. The accused would not be entitled to a copy unless ordered by the Court. The Writ Petition was adjourned for further proceedings.
Issues: 1. Coercive action against petitioners in a specific file. 2. Permission for advocate to accompany petitioners during interrogation. 3. Videograph recording of statements and examination of petitioners and goods.
Analysis: 1. The High Court addressed the issue of coercive action against the petitioners in a specific file, referencing orders dated 6/12/2018 and 10/12/2018 in WP No. 5455 of 2018, which is still pending before the Apex Court. The court ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners till the next date concerning File No. DR I/MZU/C/INT202/ 2018.
2. Regarding the permission for the advocate to accompany the petitioners during interrogation, the court allowed the advocate to be present at a visible but not audible distance during the interrogation by the officers of DRI. This permission was granted in accordance with a general direction given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Sajnani Versus Union of India.
3. The High Court also addressed the issue of videograph recording of statements and examination of petitioners and goods. Referring to a statement recorded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its order dated 7th December, 2010, the court directed that the Department shall videograph the recording of the statement and examination of the petitioners and goods. The costs for the videography were to be borne by the petitioners, and it was emphasized that the accused would not be entitled to a copy unless ordered by the Court. The Writ Petition was adjourned to 10th January, 2019 for further proceedings.
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 
