https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758300 A conviction under the NDPS Act cannot stand where a house search is not part of the same transaction as the earlier auto-rickshaw raid and is undertaken after a time gap for a separate recovery. The house search also failed to satisfy the mandatory safeguards under Sections 41 and 42, because the written information related only to the auto-rickshaw and no valid basis of personal knowledge for the house search was proved. Statements recorded under Section 67 were treated as inadmissible confessional material and could not independently sustain guilt. The convictions were therefore set aside and the accused were acquitted. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Sep 2024 14:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758300 A conviction under the NDPS Act cannot stand where a house search is not part of the same transaction as the earlier auto-rickshaw raid and is undertaken after a time gap for a separate recovery. The house search also failed to satisfy the mandatory safeguards under Sections 41 and 42, because the written information related only to the auto-rickshaw and no valid basis of personal knowledge for the house search was proved. Statements recorded under Section 67 were treated as inadmissible confessional material and could not independently sustain guilt. The convictions were therefore set aside and the accused were acquitted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758300