https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164869 In prosecutions under the NDPS Act, the prosecution must prove an unbroken and reliable chain of custody for the seized substance. The Court found a serious gap in custody evidence: there was unexplained delay in production, no clear proof of who kept the article, whether it remained sealed, or how it was preserved before chemical examination. Because the record did not satisfactorily establish that the sample analysed was the very article recovered from the accused, the conviction could not be sustained. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2014 14:06:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164869 In prosecutions under the NDPS Act, the prosecution must prove an unbroken and reliable chain of custody for the seized substance. The Court found a serious gap in custody evidence: there was unexplained delay in production, no clear proof of who kept the article, whether it remained sealed, or how it was preserved before chemical examination. Because the record did not satisfactorily establish that the sample analysed was the very article recovered from the accused, the conviction could not be sustained. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 21 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164869