https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265141 Recovery of ganja from a truck was upheld where consistent official testimony proved interception, seizure, sealing, sampling and chemical analysis, even though no independent witness was examined and minor discrepancies in time and place of seizure were present. The court held that those discrepancies did not undermine the core prosecution case and that the personal-search safeguard under the NDPS Act did not apply because the recovery was from a vehicle, not the person of the accused. It further held that the conviction was not based solely on Section 67 statements, as the raiding officers' evidence and laboratory report independently supported guilt. The conviction and sentence were affirmed. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:55:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265141 Recovery of ganja from a truck was upheld where consistent official testimony proved interception, seizure, sealing, sampling and chemical analysis, even though no independent witness was examined and minor discrepancies in time and place of seizure were present. The court held that those discrepancies did not undermine the core prosecution case and that the personal-search safeguard under the NDPS Act did not apply because the recovery was from a vehicle, not the person of the accused. It further held that the conviction was not based solely on Section 67 statements, as the raiding officers' evidence and laboratory report independently supported guilt. The conviction and sentence were affirmed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 09 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265141