https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42266 In a customs and import control prosecution, the HC found no basis to interfere with the trial court's acquittal because the prosecution case depended mainly on two customs officers, lacked independent corroboration, and was unsupported by reliable contemporaneous evidence of seizure. Prior statements, departmental reports, and the panchanama did not cure the material gaps, and other available customs officers were not examined. Applying the settled rule that an acquittal should not be disturbed where the trial court's view is possible and probable, and the evidence does not establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the acquittal was left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:41:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42266 In a customs and import control prosecution, the HC found no basis to interfere with the trial court's acquittal because the prosecution case depended mainly on two customs officers, lacked independent corroboration, and was unsupported by reliable contemporaneous evidence of seizure. Prior statements, departmental reports, and the panchanama did not cure the material gaps, and other available customs officers were not examined. Applying the settled rule that an acquittal should not be disturbed where the trial court's view is possible and probable, and the evidence does not establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the acquittal was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 10 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42266