Decoding The Enquiries Under Prevention Of Money Laundering Act, Customs Act Vis-A-Vis The Personal Liberty: (PART 1)

India is one amongst the country who is apart from transforming its own economy, is proving its mettle at the world's stage. He/they should be made to sit at a distance beyond hearing range, but within visible distance and the lawyer must be prepared to be present whenever the Petitioners are called upon to attend such interrogation.' whereby the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in similarly observed vide para 8 as 'In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the respondent is directed that as and when the petitioner is called upon under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 by the customs authorities, he shall be interrogated in the presence of his Advocate who shall be available at a visible distance but beyond the hearing range. The next line follows of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 'Jignesh Kishore Bhai Vs State of Gujarat' CIRLJ 1760 whereby it was observed vide para 39, it was observed as 'In view of the aforesaid, I hold that although the applicant cannot claim the relief, as a matter of right, yet as of abundant caution and prudence, I am inclined to permit the counsel for the choice of the applicant to remain present within visible distance, but beyond the hearing range.' The Hon'ble Bombay High Court on the same lines in catena of judgments for reference in the case of 'Raju Ram Purohit Vs Union of India' categorically passed an order as in Para 7 as 'in view of the statement which is recorded by the Hon'ble Apex court in its order dated 7/12/2010 in Rajendra Arora and Ors vs. UOI and Ors in Writ Petition No 389 of 2010, we direct that Department shall videograph recording of the statement and examination of the Petitioner as well as goods.