https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174791 A lawful search and seizure under Section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not, by itself, infringe Article 20(3) of the Constitution, because the protection against self-incrimination applies to compelled testimonial disclosure, not to passive submission to a search conducted under lawful authority. The provision also permits a general search where the court considers search or inspection necessary for the purposes of the proceeding. On the stated facts, the warrant for the premises of an institution was treated as sustainable under Section 93(1)(c), and the materials sought were not in the accused's personal custody in the relevant constitutional sense. en-us Tue, 18 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Nov 2018 11:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174791 A lawful search and seizure under Section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not, by itself, infringe Article 20(3) of the Constitution, because the protection against self-incrimination applies to compelled testimonial disclosure, not to passive submission to a search conducted under lawful authority. The provision also permits a general search where the court considers search or inspection necessary for the purposes of the proceeding. On the stated facts, the warrant for the premises of an institution was treated as sustainable under Section 93(1)(c), and the materials sought were not in the accused's personal custody in the relevant constitutional sense. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174791