Vakamulla Chandrashekhar v. Enforcement Directorate & ANR.

$~46.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 472/2017 and Crl. M.A. No.2623/2017 VAKAMULLA CHANDRASHEKHAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate along with Mr.

L.M.

Asthana, Mr.Siddhant Asthana & Mr. Lovdeep Gaur, Advocates.

versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Mr. Anup K., Asstt. Director.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 15.02.2017 The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek a writ of certiorari quashing summons dated 02.02.2017 issued to the petitioner under Section 50(2) and (3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus to seek a direction that the respondents may not take any coercive steps and his personal liberty may not be curtailed during the pendency of the investigation. Learned counsel for the respondents has appeared on advance notice.

After some arguments, Mr. Uppal submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if during the petitioner's examination, the petitioner is permitted to be accompanied by his counsel such that he is able to see the process of the petitioner's examination while he is not able to hear the same. Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, states that the respondent has no quarrel with the said arrangement being devised. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction that at the time when the petitioner appears for his examination, he shall be permitted to be accompanied by his counsel. The counsel shall be seated such that he is able to see the examination of the petitioner but the said examination shall not be audible to the counsel.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Dasti.

VIPIN SANGHI, J FEBRUARY 15, 2017 B.S. Rohella