<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (2) TMI 241 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271536</link>
    <description>A conviction under the NDPS Act can rest on credible official testimony and voluntary Section 67 statements even where panch witnesses are not examined. The non-examination of independent witnesses was not treated as fatal because the DRI officers were cross-examined and no material was shown to indicate false implication or unreliability. The defence also failed to prove tampering or unexplained delay, as the samples remained sealed and the chain of custody was intact. Section 67 statements were treated as voluntary and corroborated by recovery and officer testimony, so the conviction and sentence were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 10:20:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 241 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271536</link>
      <description>A conviction under the NDPS Act can rest on credible official testimony and voluntary Section 67 statements even where panch witnesses are not examined. The non-examination of independent witnesses was not treated as fatal because the DRI officers were cross-examined and no material was shown to indicate false implication or unreliability. The defence also failed to prove tampering or unexplained delay, as the samples remained sealed and the chain of custody was intact. Section 67 statements were treated as voluntary and corroborated by recovery and officer testimony, so the conviction and sentence were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271536</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>