Advocate Presence & Videography Granted During Customs Interrogation, Petitioner's Attendance Mandatory.

The HC of Bombay granted the petition, allowing the petitioner's advocate to be present at a visible but not audible distance during interrogation under Section 108 of the Customs Act. Videography of the interrogation was also permitted at the petitioner's expense. The petitioner must attend when summoned, regardless of the advocate's or videographer's availability. The rule was made absolute on these terms, and the matter was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues involved:
The petition seeks a writ/order/direction for recording the petitioner's statement u/s 108 of the Customs Act in the presence of his advocate and permission for videography of the interrogation at the petitioner's cost.

Recording of Statement u/s 108 of the Customs Act:
The petitioner sought permission for his advocate to be present during interrogation and for videography of the interrogation. The petitioner, being the recipient of the goods cleared by Customs, was willing to cooperate with the investigation. The petitioner's counsel relied on a previous decision of the Division Bench where such permission was granted in a similar case. The prayers were opposed by the respondent's counsel. The Court, considering the previous judgment, allowed the petitioner's advocate to be present at a visible but not audible distance during interrogation. Videography of the interrogation was also permitted, with the cost to be borne by the petitioner. It was clarified that the absence of the advocate or videographer would not be a valid reason for the petitioner to not attend when summoned by the authority. The rule was made absolute on the specified terms, allowing the petition and disposing of the matter accordingly.

Conclusion:
The High Court of Bombay allowed the petition, granting permission for the petitioner's advocate to be present during interrogation u/s 108 of the Customs Act and for videography of the interrogation at the petitioner's cost. The Court emphasized that the petitioner must still attend when summoned, even if the advocate or videographer is unavailable.

---