2015 (10) TMI 2652 - HC - Customs

Interrogation under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that - The petitioner would be permitted to be accompanied by his counsel to DRI Office when he next goes there for being interrogated under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
- Prayer for issuance of an order to permit interrogation under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 only within office hours and in the presence of an advocate.
- Apprehension of force and coercion during interrogation.
- Allegation of being directed to appear without proper notice.
- Request to be accompanied by a lawyer during interrogation.
- Denial of allegations by the respondent.
- Reference to relevant judgments by both parties.
- Decision on allowing the petitioner to be accompanied by counsel during interrogation.

Analysis:

The petitioner sought an order to allow interrogation under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 only during office hours and in the presence of an advocate due to apprehensions of force and coercion. The petitioner had cooperated with the investigation but expressed concerns about being summoned without proper notice, leading to an arrest and subsequent judicial custody without recording a statement. The petitioner requested to be accompanied by a lawyer to prevent coercion during interrogation.

The respondent denied the allegations and opposed the petitioner's request to have legal representation during interrogation. Reference was made to a Supreme Court judgment stating that questioning without legal assistance does not violate constitutional rights. However, the petitioner's counsel cited cases where such concessions were granted, emphasizing the need for legal accompaniment during interrogation.

Considering the petitioner's apprehensions, the Court agreed to the request for legal representation. The petitioner was permitted to have a lawyer present at the DRI Office during interrogation, ensuring the counsel remained within visible distance but out of audibility range. The lawyer accompanying the petitioner was instructed not to demand participation in the interrogation process inside the DRI Office. The petition was allowed, and the order was issued accordingly, granting the petitioner the right to have legal representation during interrogation under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962.