Court orders clear notice 72 hrs prior to appearance, advocates' presence, video recording, office hours.

The Court directed the Respondents to issue a clear notice 72 hours before fixing the date for the petitioners' appearance in response to the summonses already issued, allowing the presence of Advocates at visible but not audible distance and permitting videography of the interrogation at the cost of the petitioners. The interrogation and recording of statements were to be conducted during office hours, and the writ petition was allowed in the specified terms, with the rule made absolute and no order as to costs.

---

---

Issues:
- Petition seeking direction for issuance of Summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962
- Interim Order by Supreme Court preventing coercive action
- Presence of Advocates during investigation
- Petition filed before Supreme Court for similar reliefs
- Direction for issuance of Summons for recording voluntary statement
- Permission for presence of Advocate at visible but not audible distance
- Videography of interrogation at the cost of Petitioners
- Compliance with principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court

Analysis:
1. The petitioners sought a direction for the Respondent No. 1 to issue Summons for their appearance under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, allowing the presence of their Advocate at visible but not audible distance and videography of their interrogation at their cost.
2. The petitioners had filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court seeking similar reliefs, and an interim Order was issued preventing coercive steps against them, which was still in force.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied on a judgment allowing the presence of Advocates during investigation at visible but not audible distance, citing previous orders by the High Court and the Supreme Court granting such permission.
4. The Respondents argued that since a writ petition was already pending before the Supreme Court for similar reliefs, there was no cause of action for the current petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
5. The Court, following the precedent set in a previous case, directed the Respondents to issue a clear notice 72 hours before fixing the date for the petitioners' appearance in response to the summonses already issued, allowing the presence of Advocates at visible but not audible distance and permitting videography of the interrogation at the cost of the petitioners.
6. The interrogation and recording of statements were to be conducted during office hours, and the writ petition was allowed in the specified terms, with the rule made absolute and no order as to costs.

---