<?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>2020 (5) TMI 534 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395501</link>
    <description>A chance recovery of suspected narcotic material during a lawful search under another enactment does not, by itself, amount to an illegal NDPS seizure. The text explains that Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act restrict search and seizure powers to empowered or authorised officers acting within the statutory conditions, but where officers conducting a different search unexpectedly find suspected contraband, temporary custody before formal verification and seizure by empowered NDPS officers is not treated as a seizure in the juristic sense. Any complaint about delayed communication or irregularity was said to affect evidentiary weight at trial, not justify discharge at that stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2020 19:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 534 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395501</link>
      <description>A chance recovery of suspected narcotic material during a lawful search under another enactment does not, by itself, amount to an illegal NDPS seizure. The text explains that Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act restrict search and seizure powers to empowered or authorised officers acting within the statutory conditions, but where officers conducting a different search unexpectedly find suspected contraband, temporary custody before formal verification and seizure by empowered NDPS officers is not treated as a seizure in the juristic sense. Any complaint about delayed communication or irregularity was said to affect evidentiary weight at trial, not justify discharge at that stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395501</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>