<?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>2012 (10) TMI 996 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172736</link>
    <description>In NDPS prosecutions, conviction may rest on reliable official witnesses even where an independent witness is not examined, particularly when the witness&#039;s presence at the spot is reflected in the seizure records and no animosity or unreliability is shown. The court accepted the police testimony with the seizure memorandum, FIR and FSL report, and rejected the challenge based on non-examination of the independent witness. It also held that mixing contraband from two bags before sampling did not vitiate the case or cause prejudice, because the recovered quantity remained commercial and no infirmity affecting the foundation of the charge was demonstrated. The conviction and sentence were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 12:24:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395135" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 996 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172736</link>
      <description>In NDPS prosecutions, conviction may rest on reliable official witnesses even where an independent witness is not examined, particularly when the witness&#039;s presence at the spot is reflected in the seizure records and no animosity or unreliability is shown. The court accepted the police testimony with the seizure memorandum, FIR and FSL report, and rejected the challenge based on non-examination of the independent witness. It also held that mixing contraband from two bags before sampling did not vitiate the case or cause prejudice, because the recovered quantity remained commercial and no infirmity affecting the foundation of the charge was demonstrated. The conviction and sentence were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>