https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169236 Exclusive possession of postal articles is essential before an inference of secretion can support conviction of a postal officer. Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act covers secreting postal articles, and delayed delivery does not remove articles from the course of postal transmission; entrustment is not required for secretion. However, recovery from an almirah jointly occupied with the accused's father, where the father produced the key, did not prove the accused's exclusive possession. Speculation based on opportunity could not replace proof. Search irregularities did not invalidate seizure, no timely prejudice was shown from examination of the accused, and reversal of acquittal and consecutive sentences raised no independent basis to sustain conviction. The conviction and sentences could not stand. en-us Thu, 27 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2015 11:25:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169236 Exclusive possession of postal articles is essential before an inference of secretion can support conviction of a postal officer. Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act covers secreting postal articles, and delayed delivery does not remove articles from the course of postal transmission; entrustment is not required for secretion. However, recovery from an almirah jointly occupied with the accused's father, where the father produced the key, did not prove the accused's exclusive possession. Speculation based on opportunity could not replace proof. Search irregularities did not invalidate seizure, no timely prejudice was shown from examination of the accused, and reversal of acquittal and consecutive sentences raised no independent basis to sustain conviction. The conviction and sentences could not stand. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169236