<?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>2016 (3) TMI 1495 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467358</link>
    <description>Credible official witnesses can sustain an NDPS conviction where public persons were repeatedly sought but declined to join, and their absence does not by itself create doubt. Delay in FIR registration, minor testimonial inconsistencies, and partial sampling of seized material were treated as non-material because the sequence at the spot explained the timing and the samples were drawn from the recovered packets. Recovery from a public place was held to fall under Section 43 of the NDPS Act, making Section 42 inapplicable. Delay in forwarding samples to the FSL was not fatal because the seals and chain of custody remained intact and no tampering was proved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2026 11:27:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 1495 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467358</link>
      <description>Credible official witnesses can sustain an NDPS conviction where public persons were repeatedly sought but declined to join, and their absence does not by itself create doubt. Delay in FIR registration, minor testimonial inconsistencies, and partial sampling of seized material were treated as non-material because the sequence at the spot explained the timing and the samples were drawn from the recovered packets. Recovery from a public place was held to fall under Section 43 of the NDPS Act, making Section 42 inapplicable. Delay in forwarding samples to the FSL was not fatal because the seals and chain of custody remained intact and no tampering was proved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>