https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186926 Police negligence in handling seized property was established because the articles were not properly listed, weighed, secured, or deposited as required by custody regulations. The loss was therefore traced to gross neglect after seizure. However, State liability was excluded because the seizure, search, and custodial handling were treated as acts done in the exercise of sovereign powers under Article 300(1) of the Constitution. The governing principle is that no tort action lies against the State for negligence referable to sovereign functions, even where the public servants' mishandling is proved. en-us Tue, 29 Sep 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Oct 2016 16:27:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186926 Police negligence in handling seized property was established because the articles were not properly listed, weighed, secured, or deposited as required by custody regulations. The loss was therefore traced to gross neglect after seizure. However, State liability was excluded because the seizure, search, and custodial handling were treated as acts done in the exercise of sovereign powers under Article 300(1) of the Constitution. The governing principle is that no tort action lies against the State for negligence referable to sovereign functions, even where the public servants' mishandling is proved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Sep 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186926