https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338301 A person summoned for examination under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not, by that fact alone, an accused or a person in custody, so Article 20(3) and Article 22(1) protections do not create an absolute right to have an advocate present during questioning. The statutory scheme allows attendance to be required in person or through an authorised agent, and counsel's presence during interrogation is not mandatory as a matter of right. As a practical safeguard, the Court noted that permitting an advocate to remain within visible distance but beyond hearing range may help prevent allegations of coercion. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:39:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338301 A person summoned for examination under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not, by that fact alone, an accused or a person in custody, so Article 20(3) and Article 22(1) protections do not create an absolute right to have an advocate present during questioning. The statutory scheme allows attendance to be required in person or through an authorised agent, and counsel's presence during interrogation is not mandatory as a matter of right. As a practical safeguard, the Court noted that permitting an advocate to remain within visible distance but beyond hearing range may help prevent allegations of coercion. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338301