https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173998 A statement recorded under Section 40(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 is not treated like a judicial confession under Section 164 CrPC; even if retracted, it may still be relied on if the court is satisfied about voluntariness, truthfulness, and corroboration from surrounding materials. Here, the seized visiting card and diary entries provided corroboration, and the absence of other participants as witnesses did not defeat that support. The claim that the statement was involuntary because no advocate was present was rejected, as there was no right to counsel at that stage. The retracted statement was therefore admissible and the conviction was restored. en-us Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:25:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173998 A statement recorded under Section 40(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 is not treated like a judicial confession under Section 164 CrPC; even if retracted, it may still be relied on if the court is satisfied about voluntariness, truthfulness, and corroboration from surrounding materials. Here, the seized visiting card and diary entries provided corroboration, and the absence of other participants as witnesses did not defeat that support. The claim that the statement was involuntary because no advocate was present was rejected, as there was no right to counsel at that stage. The retracted statement was therefore admissible and the conviction was restored. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173998