https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101571 A person summoned under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 may seek the presence of an advocate during interrogation, because the statutory duty to answer truthfully operates alongside constitutional protection against self-incrimination and the right to legal consultation. The court treated the interrogation as near-custodial in character and accepted that counsel may be present to safeguard those rights. However, counsel cannot actively intervene, object during questioning, or turn the inquiry into an adversarial proceeding; the permissible role is limited to silent presence, with objections to be recorded in writing after interrogation. The impugned order was set aside and legal representation was allowed subject to these limits. en-us Tue, 11 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:29:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101571 A person summoned under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 may seek the presence of an advocate during interrogation, because the statutory duty to answer truthfully operates alongside constitutional protection against self-incrimination and the right to legal consultation. The court treated the interrogation as near-custodial in character and accepted that counsel may be present to safeguard those rights. However, counsel cannot actively intervene, object during questioning, or turn the inquiry into an adversarial proceeding; the permissible role is limited to silent presence, with objections to be recorded in writing after interrogation. The impugned order was set aside and legal representation was allowed subject to these limits. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 11 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101571