https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172719 In an NDPS prosecution, the conviction was upheld because the empowered officer recorded the information in writing and conveyed it to superiors, satisfying Section 42, the accused were informed of their right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate in compliance with Section 50, and the seizure, sealing of samples, and forensic confirmation showed no infirmity under Section 57. The co-accused's acquittal was also sustained because the lower courts found insufficient reliable material linking them to the offence, and no perversity or legal error was shown in those concurrent findings. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172719 In an NDPS prosecution, the conviction was upheld because the empowered officer recorded the information in writing and conveyed it to superiors, satisfying Section 42, the accused were informed of their right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate in compliance with Section 50, and the seizure, sealing of samples, and forensic confirmation showed no infirmity under Section 57. The co-accused's acquittal was also sustained because the lower courts found insufficient reliable material linking them to the offence, and no perversity or legal error was shown in those concurrent findings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172719