<?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>2000 (10) TMI 989 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462213</link>
    <description>A conviction under the NDPS Act may be sustained on a voluntary Section 67 statement where the record does not show coercion, threat, or force, and where alleged defects under Sections 42 and 57 are met by substantial compliance through official recording and reporting; the conviction of that appellant was upheld. By contrast, a vague or non-incriminating statement, unsupported by recovery of narcotic substance, consideration, or other circumstances showing participation, cannot sustain guilt, and Section 30 could not be invoked at a later stage when it was neither part of the charge nor the findings below; the other appellant&#039;s conviction was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 09:59:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=826153" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 989 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462213</link>
      <description>A conviction under the NDPS Act may be sustained on a voluntary Section 67 statement where the record does not show coercion, threat, or force, and where alleged defects under Sections 42 and 57 are met by substantial compliance through official recording and reporting; the conviction of that appellant was upheld. By contrast, a vague or non-incriminating statement, unsupported by recovery of narcotic substance, consideration, or other circumstances showing participation, cannot sustain guilt, and Section 30 could not be invoked at a later stage when it was neither part of the charge nor the findings below; the other appellant&#039;s conviction was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>