<?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 (5) TMI 1389 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458364</link>
    <description>Where seized narcotic contraband is sampled at the time of seizure without complying with Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the prosecution case may be seriously weakened. The statutory procedure requires forwarding the seized substance for inventory preparation and drawing representative samples in the presence and under the supervision of the Magistrate, with certification of the process. Immediate sampling by the police officer, without Magistrate supervision, was treated as inconsistent with that requirement and created doubt about the reliability of the seized substance. On that reasoning, the conviction and sentence were set aside because the prosecution was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2024 19:36:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (5) TMI 1389 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458364</link>
      <description>Where seized narcotic contraband is sampled at the time of seizure without complying with Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the prosecution case may be seriously weakened. The statutory procedure requires forwarding the seized substance for inventory preparation and drawing representative samples in the presence and under the supervision of the Magistrate, with certification of the process. Immediate sampling by the police officer, without Magistrate supervision, was treated as inconsistent with that requirement and created doubt about the reliability of the seized substance. On that reasoning, the conviction and sentence were set aside because the prosecution was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458364</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>