J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Mitesh Amin, the learned Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No. 1- State of Gujarat. Mr. Devang Vyas, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No. 2- Directorate of Enforcement and waives service of notice of rule.

2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant, who has been served with a summons issued under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement in connection with the ECIR/01/STSZO/2016, has prayed for the following reliefs:

"17a. Issue appropriate directions to the respondents to allow the presence of petitioner's advocate at a visible but not audible distance during the course of interrogation and/or recording of the statement of the petitioner in case arising out of ECIR NO.01/STSZO2016, wherein, the petitioner has summoned by the respondents.

b. Pending admission, final hearing and disposal of the instant writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings arising out of summons issued to the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 may further be restrained from taking any coercive action/steps against the petitioner.

c. Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner.

d. Costs of the petitioner be awarded in favour of the petitioner."

3. The facts giving rise to this application may be summarised as under:

3.1 On 28th December 2016, a First Information Report came to be registered with the CBI/ACB/Gandhinagar bearing No. RC0292016A0016 against the applicant herein and others for the offence punishable under Section 120B, 419, 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The First Information Report was lodged by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (C.B.I.), Special Division, Gandhinagar in connection with the recovery of high volume of high denomination of new currency notes from the applicant herein. It appears that the applicant and his brothers were interrogated by the C.B.I. in this regard, however, no arrest was effected. In connection with the First Information Report referred to above, the Directorate of Enforcement is contemplating filing of a complaint against the applicant and others for the offence punishable under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. No complaint has been lodged till this date before the Designated Court in this regard. However, it appears that the proceedings are at the stage of ECIR referred to above.

3.2 It is the case of the applicant herein that he has been served with a summons issued by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement under Section 50 of the Act, 2002 to remain present for the purpose of interrogation.

3.3 It is his case that he is duty bound to honour the summons and would extent full cooperation to the concerned authorities, however, his prayer is that his lawyer may be allowed to be present within the visible distance, but beyond the hearing range during the course of his interrogation. The apprehension expressed by the applicant herein is that the authorities may try to forcibly extort confession which is admissible in evidence. To put it in other words, the apprehension expressed by the applicant is that the authorities concerned may misuse the official power and in the name of interrogation, the applicant may be subjected to torture and wholly false and fictitious statement may be recorded under the duress.

4. Hence, this application.

5. Mr. Chaudhary, the learned senior advocate appearing for the applicant vehemently submitted that the reliefs prayed for in this application may be granted to protect the right of his cl