https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100054 A statement recorded from the appellant under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was treated as admissible and voluntary because sections 24 and 25 of the Evidence Act did not apply to an enforcement officer, who was not a police officer, and the appellant was not yet an accused when the statement was made. A prompt retraction did not, by itself, displace its evidentiary value, and the allegation of coercion was found unsubstantiated. Independent support from the appellant's father's statement reinforced the finding of contravention under section 5(1)(aa), and the penalty was upheld. en-us Wed, 04 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:02:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100054 A statement recorded from the appellant under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was treated as admissible and voluntary because sections 24 and 25 of the Evidence Act did not apply to an enforcement officer, who was not a police officer, and the appellant was not yet an accused when the statement was made. A prompt retraction did not, by itself, displace its evidentiary value, and the allegation of coercion was found unsubstantiated. Independent support from the appellant's father's statement reinforced the finding of contravention under section 5(1)(aa), and the penalty was upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 04 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100054