<?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>2006 (1) TMI 669 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302283</link>
    <description>In an NDPS public-place search, the Gujarat HC treated contemporaneous recording of information in the preliminary panchnama and movement register as sufficient compliance with statutory safeguards, and rejected the challenge to the raid and seizure. It further held that minor discrepancies about the gate, sampling, sealing, custody and production of muddamal did not create reasonable doubt where the contraband and samples were shown to have remained intact through forensic examination and identification in court. On the facts, the co-accused&#039;s joint presence, attempted flight and coordinated conduct brought them within the conspiracy or abetment provision, and the convictions and sentences were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 May 2022 16:05:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 669 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302283</link>
      <description>In an NDPS public-place search, the Gujarat HC treated contemporaneous recording of information in the preliminary panchnama and movement register as sufficient compliance with statutory safeguards, and rejected the challenge to the raid and seizure. It further held that minor discrepancies about the gate, sampling, sealing, custody and production of muddamal did not create reasonable doubt where the contraband and samples were shown to have remained intact through forensic examination and identification in court. On the facts, the co-accused&#039;s joint presence, attempted flight and coordinated conduct brought them within the conspiracy or abetment provision, and the convictions and sentences were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>