https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174328 In a narcotics prosecution, the prosecution must prove the accused's connection with the premises and possession of the seized contraband, and it must also establish an unimpeached chain of custody for the samples. The record described here was found deficient on both counts: no reliable evidence linked the accused to the premises, tenancy material pointed to another person, and witness testimony did not support the alleged recovery. The custody evidence was also incomplete because the seal, sample movement, malkhana record, and laboratory handling were not satisfactorily proved. These failures justified the benefit of doubt and rendered the conviction unsustainable. en-us Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:17:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174328 In a narcotics prosecution, the prosecution must prove the accused's connection with the premises and possession of the seized contraband, and it must also establish an unimpeached chain of custody for the samples. The record described here was found deficient on both counts: no reliable evidence linked the accused to the premises, tenancy material pointed to another person, and witness testimony did not support the alleged recovery. The custody evidence was also incomplete because the seal, sample movement, malkhana record, and laboratory handling were not satisfactorily proved. These failures justified the benefit of doubt and rendered the conviction unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174328