https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173370 In a public-place NDPS recovery at the roof of a car parking, the statutory regime was held to be Section 43 rather than Section 42, so prior written recording of secret information under Section 42 was not required; the objection on that ground failed. Section 50 was found inapplicable because the contraband was recovered from a bag, and the presence of the FIR number on seizure documents did not, by itself, invalidate the recovery. Alleged defects in the CFSL form, seal movement, and 13-day sample dispatch delay were rejected because the prosecution proved safe custody, proper sealing, and an intact evidentiary chain, so the conviction was affirmed. en-us Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Dec 2016 15:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173370 In a public-place NDPS recovery at the roof of a car parking, the statutory regime was held to be Section 43 rather than Section 42, so prior written recording of secret information under Section 42 was not required; the objection on that ground failed. Section 50 was found inapplicable because the contraband was recovered from a bag, and the presence of the FIR number on seizure documents did not, by itself, invalidate the recovery. Alleged defects in the CFSL form, seal movement, and 13-day sample dispatch delay were rejected because the prosecution proved safe custody, proper sealing, and an intact evidentiary chain, so the conviction was affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173370