<?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>2010 (4) TMI 1042 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172693</link>
    <description>Possession under NDPS law may be physical or constructive and requires knowledge and control; once possession is established, the burden shifts to the accused to explain it. The SC found the respondents were in conscious possession of contraband because they were sitting on bags, attempted to hide on seeing police, and offered no satisfactory explanation. Minor discrepancies in prosecution evidence and a seven-day delay in sending sealed samples to the laboratory were held not material absent proof of tampering or prejudice. The acquittal was therefore found perverse and unsustainable, and the trial court conviction was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 1042 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172693</link>
      <description>Possession under NDPS law may be physical or constructive and requires knowledge and control; once possession is established, the burden shifts to the accused to explain it. The SC found the respondents were in conscious possession of contraband because they were sitting on bags, attempted to hide on seeing police, and offered no satisfactory explanation. Minor discrepancies in prosecution evidence and a seven-day delay in sending sealed samples to the laboratory were held not material absent proof of tampering or prejudice. The acquittal was therefore found perverse and unsustainable, and the trial court conviction was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>