<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (2) TMI 1004 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160943</link>
    <description>Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to a search of the person; recovery from a bag or other receptacle carried by an accused does not by itself attract that safeguard, so its non-application did not invalidate the recovery here. However, serious defects in seizure, sealing, custody, and reporting under Sections 52, 55 and 57, including insecure handling of the seal and lack of reliable proof that the sample reached the chemical examiner with intact seals, created a substantial doubt about the prosecution evidence. The combined irregularities in investigation and preservation of the seized substance rendered the conviction unsafe, and the conviction and sentence were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2026 23:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 1004 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160943</link>
      <description>Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to a search of the person; recovery from a bag or other receptacle carried by an accused does not by itself attract that safeguard, so its non-application did not invalidate the recovery here. However, serious defects in seizure, sealing, custody, and reporting under Sections 52, 55 and 57, including insecure handling of the seal and lack of reliable proof that the sample reached the chemical examiner with intact seals, created a substantial doubt about the prosecution evidence. The combined irregularities in investigation and preservation of the seized substance rendered the conviction unsafe, and the conviction and sentence were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>