Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhavika Soni, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) to permit her to attend proceedings during her interrogation in the presence of her advocate, who would be at a visible but not audible distance. She also sought permission for videography of the interrogation at her own cost. The petitioner was being prosecuted under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. The court, relying on its earlier Division Bench decisions in Civil Writ Petition No.6558 of 2021 and Criminal Writ Petition No.3909 of 2022, allowed the petition. The court directed that the petitioner's advocate may remain present at a visible distance during the interrogation, and videography of the proceedings shall be permitted at the petitioner's cost. The court also clarified that the advocate should not interfere with the interrogation process. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right to Counsel during Interrogation - Customs Act, 1962, Section 135 - Petitioner sought permission to have advocate present at visible but not audible distance during DRI interrogation and videography at her cost - Court allowed the prayer, relying on earlier Division Bench decisions - Held that the presence of an advocate at visible distance and videography of interrogation are permissible to ensure fairness and transparency (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a person summoned for interrogation by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) under the Customs Act, 1962 is entitled to have his advocate present at a visible but not audible distance, and whether videography of the interrogation should be permitted.
Final Decision
Petition allowed. Petitioner's advocate may remain present at a visible distance during interrogation, and videography of proceedings shall be permitted at petitioner's cost. Advocate not to interfere with interrogation process.
Law Points
- Right to counsel during interrogation
- Videography of interrogation
- Customs Act 1962 Section 135
- Directorate of Revenue Intelligence proceedings
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (03) 34
Writ Petition No.3492 of 2023
Revati Mohite Dere, Manjusha Deshpande
Mr. Brijesh Pathak a/w Mr. Shrey Lodha for Petitioner, Mrs. P.P. Shinde APP for Respondent State, Mrs. Sangeeta Yadav for Respondent No.2
Union of India, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking direction to DRI to permit advocate presence and videography during interrogation
Remedy Sought
Direction to Respondent No.2-DRI to permit petitioner to attend proceedings in presence of advocate at visible but not audible distance, and videography of interrogation at petitioner's cost
Filing Reason
Petitioner being prosecuted under Section 135 of Customs Act, 1962 and sought fair interrogation with advocate presence and videography
Previous Decisions
Division Bench decisions in Civil Writ Petition No.6558 of 2021 dated 1st February 2022 and Criminal Writ Petition No.3909 of 2022
Issues
Whether petitioner is entitled to have advocate present at visible distance during DRI interrogation
Whether videography of interrogation should be permitted
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner relied on earlier Division Bench decisions allowing similar relief
Petitioner submitted that prosecution is under Section 135 of Customs Act, 1962
Ratio Decidendi
The presence of an advocate at a visible distance and videography of interrogation are permissible to ensure fairness and transparency in proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962, as held in earlier Division Bench decisions.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondent No.2–DRI to permit the Petitioner to attend the proceedings in question before the DRI in his advocate’s presence i.e. the advocate would be at a visible distance, but not audible distance, during the course of his interrogation by the Respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 1st February 2022 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.6558 of 2021, as well as the Judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.3909 of 2022.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.3492 of 2023 before Bombay High Court seeking direction to DRI. Rule was issued and taken up for final disposal with consent of parties.
Acts & Sections
