Counsel presence during customs interrogation remains limited to visible distance beyond hearing range, without participation.

A person summoned for interrogation under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 may have counsel present at a visible distance but beyond hearing range, so long as the advocate does not intervene in the questioning. The legal principle applied is that the lawyer's presence is limited to preventing coercive methods and preserving fair treatment, without participating in the interrogation. On that basis, the requested arrangement for counsel's presence was found to accord with the settled position.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, when summoned for interrogation under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, was entitled to have his advocate present at a visible distance but beyond hearing range.

Analysis: The petition invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to seek a mandamus for interrogation in the presence of counsel. The Court relied on the settled position that counsel may remain present only to ensure that no coercive methods are adopted, provided the lawyer stays beyond hearing range and does not participate in the interrogation. The petitioner's request was found to be consistent with that principle.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to be interrogated under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 in the presence of his advocate seated at a visible distance but beyond hearing range, without interference in the interrogation.

---