https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164866 A conviction under the NDPS Act could not be sustained where the alleged recovery of charas was from an open, accessible place and the police already knew the location of concealment, because that undermined the prosecution version of discovery through the accused's disclosure; the first appellant was acquitted. By contrast, the search of the second appellant complied with the Section 50 safeguard because he was informed of the right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer and knowingly declined that option; the conviction and sentence were upheld. en-us Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2014 13:11:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164866 A conviction under the NDPS Act could not be sustained where the alleged recovery of charas was from an open, accessible place and the police already knew the location of concealment, because that undermined the prosecution version of discovery through the accused's disclosure; the first appellant was acquitted. By contrast, the search of the second appellant complied with the Section 50 safeguard because he was informed of the right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer and knowingly declined that option; the conviction and sentence were upheld. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164866