https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193471 Search and seizure at a bus stand was treated as action in a public place under Section 43, not as search in a building, conveyance, or enclosed place under Section 42, so the requirements of recording and forwarding information did not apply. Section 50 was held inapplicable because recovery from a bag is not personal search of the body. On the evidentiary issue, retracted confessional statements were approached with caution; the first appellant's conviction was sustained on recovery, chemical analysis, and surrounding circumstances despite non-examination of independent witnesses, while the second appellant received the benefit of doubt because the remaining material against him was too slender and co-accused confession was not substantive evidence. en-us Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193471 Search and seizure at a bus stand was treated as action in a public place under Section 43, not as search in a building, conveyance, or enclosed place under Section 42, so the requirements of recording and forwarding information did not apply. Section 50 was held inapplicable because recovery from a bag is not personal search of the body. On the evidentiary issue, retracted confessional statements were approached with caution; the first appellant's conviction was sustained on recovery, chemical analysis, and surrounding circumstances despite non-examination of independent witnesses, while the second appellant received the benefit of doubt because the remaining material against him was too slender and co-accused confession was not substantive evidence. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193471