https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325939 Delhi HC declined to interfere with the acquittal because the prosecution evidence contained irreconcilable contradictions on the core fact of recovery. The record did not consistently show whether the contraband was recovered from the Maruti van or the Tata truck, or whether seizure of the truck preceded or followed the accused's statements. The sequence of search, seizure, sampling and disclosure statements was also not coherent, and these inconsistencies created serious doubt in the prosecution case. Applying the benefit of doubt standard, the court held that guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and the acquittal remained sustainable. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Apr 2016 10:32:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325939 Delhi HC declined to interfere with the acquittal because the prosecution evidence contained irreconcilable contradictions on the core fact of recovery. The record did not consistently show whether the contraband was recovered from the Maruti van or the Tata truck, or whether seizure of the truck preceded or followed the accused's statements. The sequence of search, seizure, sampling and disclosure statements was also not coherent, and these inconsistencies created serious doubt in the prosecution case. Applying the benefit of doubt standard, the court held that guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and the acquittal remained sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325939