https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173151 Search and seizure in a public place under the NDPS Act are analysed on the basis that recorded prior information under Section 42 is not required where suspicion arises during customs clearance, while Section 50 compliance is satisfied if the accused are informed of the right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate and they opt for that course. The text also states that statements recorded by customs officers may be admissible because such officers are not police officers for Evidence Act purposes, especially where there is no prompt retraction. It further notes that recovery can be supported by consistent official witnesses, intact sealed samples, and only minor sample-weight variation. en-us Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Sep 2015 15:55:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173151 Search and seizure in a public place under the NDPS Act are analysed on the basis that recorded prior information under Section 42 is not required where suspicion arises during customs clearance, while Section 50 compliance is satisfied if the accused are informed of the right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate and they opt for that course. The text also states that statements recorded by customs officers may be admissible because such officers are not police officers for Evidence Act purposes, especially where there is no prompt retraction. It further notes that recovery can be supported by consistent official witnesses, intact sealed samples, and only minor sample-weight variation. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173151