https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274388 In an opium prosecution, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution must affirmatively prove an unbroken chain of custody and the integrity of seals from seizure to analysis. Because the movement of the samples through several hands was not fully accounted for and material witnesses were withheld, the possibility of tampering or substitution remained open. Late additional evidence could not cure these evidentiary gaps, as the burden rested on the prosecution to prove its case at trial. The failure to establish that the seized opium sent to the public analyst was the same material proved fatal, and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Wed, 23 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Aug 2018 18:08:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274388 In an opium prosecution, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution must affirmatively prove an unbroken chain of custody and the integrity of seals from seizure to analysis. Because the movement of the samples through several hands was not fully accounted for and material witnesses were withheld, the possibility of tampering or substitution remained open. Late additional evidence could not cure these evidentiary gaps, as the burden rested on the prosecution to prove its case at trial. The failure to establish that the seized opium sent to the public analyst was the same material proved fatal, and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 23 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274388