https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193278 A co-accused's statement, by itself and without independent supporting material, cannot sustain a conspiracy charge at the stage of framing charge; the conspiracy allegation was therefore not maintainable. On the narcotics issue, the materials disclosed a prima facie case of possession of a book containing morphine, and morphine was treated as an opium derivative falling within section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act rather than section 22, which applies to scheduled psychotropic substances. The presumption under section 54 also supported the need for an explanation of possession. The matter was confined to framing of charge under section 21 only. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:43:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193278 A co-accused's statement, by itself and without independent supporting material, cannot sustain a conspiracy charge at the stage of framing charge; the conspiracy allegation was therefore not maintainable. On the narcotics issue, the materials disclosed a prima facie case of possession of a book containing morphine, and morphine was treated as an opium derivative falling within section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act rather than section 22, which applies to scheduled psychotropic substances. The presumption under section 54 also supported the need for an explanation of possession. The matter was confined to framing of charge under section 21 only. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 28 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193278