<?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 (9) TMI 549 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398430</link>
    <description>In an appeal against acquittal, the SC reaffirmed that the appellate court may reappreciate evidence and interfere where the trial court&#039;s view is not a possible view. Applying that standard, it upheld the conviction, finding conscious possession of charas established through control over the dhaba counter and knowledge of the contraband. It further held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to personal search, that the sealed and signed parcels reduced any risk of tampering, and that the accused failed to rebut the Section 54 presumption. The custodial sentence was reduced from 15 years to 10 years, while the fine was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:17:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=622343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 549 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398430</link>
      <description>In an appeal against acquittal, the SC reaffirmed that the appellate court may reappreciate evidence and interfere where the trial court&#039;s view is not a possible view. Applying that standard, it upheld the conviction, finding conscious possession of charas established through control over the dhaba counter and knowledge of the contraband. It further held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to personal search, that the sealed and signed parcels reduced any risk of tampering, and that the accused failed to rebut the Section 54 presumption. The custodial sentence was reduced from 15 years to 10 years, while the fine was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>