<?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>2017 (12) TMI 632 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352363</link>
    <description>Reliable police and official witness testimony, supported by intact seals and matching specimen seals, was treated as sufficient to uphold recovery of opium even without examining the independent witness. Alleged overwriting in documents and delay in sending samples to the chemical examiner were found not to undermine the chain of custody or show fabrication. The court also held that Section 50 compliance was made out because the accused were informed of the right to be searched before a gazetted officer or Magistrate and no prejudice was shown. Conscious possession and recovery of commercial quantity opium were proved beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction and sentence were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:28:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499545" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 632 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352363</link>
      <description>Reliable police and official witness testimony, supported by intact seals and matching specimen seals, was treated as sufficient to uphold recovery of opium even without examining the independent witness. Alleged overwriting in documents and delay in sending samples to the chemical examiner were found not to undermine the chain of custody or show fabrication. The court also held that Section 50 compliance was made out because the accused were informed of the right to be searched before a gazetted officer or Magistrate and no prejudice was shown. Conscious possession and recovery of commercial quantity opium were proved beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction and sentence were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>