<?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>2003 (9) TMI 769 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172282</link>
    <description>Under the NDPS Act, possession is not limited to physical custody; it may be actual or constructive, but it must be conscious possession, meaning awareness of the contraband. Once physical possession is shown, the statutory presumption applies and the accused must rebut it. On the stated facts, the accused was found sitting atop gunny bags containing poppy husk and failed to displace the presumption, so conscious possession was established and the conviction was sustained. The safeguard governing personal search was held inapplicable because the recovery was from gunny bags, not from the person, so the conviction was not vitiated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 22:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393634" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 769 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172282</link>
      <description>Under the NDPS Act, possession is not limited to physical custody; it may be actual or constructive, but it must be conscious possession, meaning awareness of the contraband. Once physical possession is shown, the statutory presumption applies and the accused must rebut it. On the stated facts, the accused was found sitting atop gunny bags containing poppy husk and failed to displace the presumption, so conscious possession was established and the conviction was sustained. The safeguard governing personal search was held inapplicable because the recovery was from gunny bags, not from the person, so the conviction was not vitiated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>