https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160819 Reverse-burden provisions under narcotics law were upheld as valid, but they operate only after the prosecution first proves the foundational facts and complies strictly with statutory safeguards. A customs confession was treated as unsafe where voluntariness was doubtful and retracted statements required independent corroboration. The prosecution also failed to prove recovery and possession beyond reasonable doubt because of material defects in seizure, sampling, custody, seals, records, and related procedure, so the conviction could not be sustained. en-us Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Sep 2025 16:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160819 Reverse-burden provisions under narcotics law were upheld as valid, but they operate only after the prosecution first proves the foundational facts and complies strictly with statutory safeguards. A customs confession was treated as unsafe where voluntariness was doubtful and retracted statements required independent corroboration. The prosecution also failed to prove recovery and possession beyond reasonable doubt because of material defects in seizure, sampling, custody, seals, records, and related procedure, so the conviction could not be sustained. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160819