SHILINDE JUDGMENT
The prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody for the narcotic drugs, and did not call a key material witness (Kapilima) to explain missing links, creating reasonable doubt as to the integrity of the evidence. This failure was material and prejudicial, warranting the quashing of the conviction and sentence.
Source excerpt
- Narcotic drugs
- Chain of custody
- Standard of proof
- Adverse inference
- Competency of witnesses