<?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>2023 (10) TMI 667 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444444</link>
    <description>Non-compliance with the mandatory procedure under Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 can vitiate the prosecution where the seized contraband is not inventoried, certified by the Magistrate, and sampled in the Magistrate&#039;s presence as required by law. The Court noted that the record did not show certification of the inventory or the sample list, and sampling before a gazetted officer did not satisfy the statutory mandate. Without a certified inventory and certified representative samples, the seized material could not be treated as primary evidence. The defect went to the root of the case, and the conviction was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 08:36:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 667 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444444</link>
      <description>Non-compliance with the mandatory procedure under Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 can vitiate the prosecution where the seized contraband is not inventoried, certified by the Magistrate, and sampled in the Magistrate&#039;s presence as required by law. The Court noted that the record did not show certification of the inventory or the sample list, and sampling before a gazetted officer did not satisfy the statutory mandate. Without a certified inventory and certified representative samples, the seized material could not be treated as primary evidence. The defect went to the root of the case, and the conviction was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>