https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245602 Non-examination of public witnesses did not vitiate the prosecution where recovery was effected in daytime at a public place and official evidence was otherwise cogent. The statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was treated as admissible corroborative evidence because it was proved by the recording officer, signed by the accused, and not shown to be coerced or involuntary. Compliance with Section 50 was upheld because the notice was issued in Hindi and English and the right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer was effectively explained. On that basis, possession of opium was proved beyond reasonable doubt and the statutory presumptions under the NDPS Act operated against the accused. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 07:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245602 Non-examination of public witnesses did not vitiate the prosecution where recovery was effected in daytime at a public place and official evidence was otherwise cogent. The statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was treated as admissible corroborative evidence because it was proved by the recording officer, signed by the accused, and not shown to be coerced or involuntary. Compliance with Section 50 was upheld because the notice was issued in Hindi and English and the right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer was effectively explained. On that basis, possession of opium was proved beyond reasonable doubt and the statutory presumptions under the NDPS Act operated against the accused. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245602