2008 (1) TMI 828 - SUPREME COURT

Whether seized material in the case is opium?

Whether aforesaid opium seized illegally kept in possession of accused Phool Chand in village Hadipipliya at about 4 o’clock on 22.2.1997 i.e. the day of incident?

Whether aforesaid opium was collected for sale by all the three accused Ram Prasad and Kanhaiya Lal with co-accused Phool Chand in co-partnership? and

Whether in this case compliance of necessary legal provisions of NDPS Act is done ?

Held that:- Since it has been held by this Court that an officer for the purposes of Section 67 of the NDPS Act read with Section 42 thereof, is not a police officer, the bar under Sections 24 and 27 of the Evidence Act cannot be attracted and the statement made by a person directed to appear before the officer concerned may be relied upon as a confessional statement against such person. Since a conviction can be maintained solely on the basis of a confession made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, we see no reason to interfere with the conclusion of the High Court convicting the appellant. Appeal dismissed.