TMI Blog1963 (4) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. If the confession goes, then obviously the conviction of the appellant cannot be sustained. Accordingly we allow the appeal' and set aside the conviction and sentences passed on the appellant. - CRL.A. 125 OF 1961 - - - Dated:- 4-4-1963 - MUDHOLKAR, J.R., SUBBARAO, K. AND DAYAL, RAGHUBAR, JJ. A.S.R. Chari, M.K. Ramamurthi, R.K. Garg, S.C. Agarwala and D.P. Singh, for the appellant D. Goburdhan, for the respondent JUDGMENT MUDHOLEAR J.- In this appeal by special leave from the judgment of the ]Patna High -Court affirming the conviction of the appellant under s. 47 (a) of the Excise Act and the sentences of rigorous imprisonment for one year and of fine amounting to Rs. 2,000 awarded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patna, the substantial question which falls for decision is whether a confession made by the appellant and recorded by the Excise Inspector who was investigating the case is inadmissible by reason of the provisions of s. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It is not disputed before us by Mr. Chari that on August 3, 1957, a motor car bearing No. WBC 562 was stopped by the Excise Inspector, R.R.P. Sinha (P.W.1) on the Bayley Roa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has also not contended that the appellant's signature was taken on a blank paper by the Excise Officers. The argument he advanced, however, is that there is no legally admissible evidence on the basis of which the appellant's conviction can be sustained. The confessional statement ]Ex. 3 upon which reliance has been placed by the High Court as supporting the evidence of P. W. 2 Debendra Prasad Singh, P. W. 3 Paresh Nath Prasad Singh and P. W. 4 Rabindra Prasad Singh is attacked as being inadmissible in evidence and it is said that if this statement is put aside the evidence of the three prosecution witnesses on whom reliance has been placed by the High Court is insufficient in law to sustain the conviction of the appellant under s. 47 (a) of the Excise Act. The relevant portion of s. 47 runs thus : Penalty for unlawful import, export, transport, manufacture, possession, sale, etc.If any person, in contravention of this Act, or of any rule, notification or order made, issued 'or given, or license, permit or pass granted, under this Act.,- (a) imports, exports, transports, manufactures, possesses or sells any intoxicant ; or... ... ... ...he shall be liable to im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the leg space in front of front seat. Again, in col. 8 wherever the appellant's name appears there appears to have been something else originally which was erased and his name written there subsequently. A bare look at the document shows that it has been materially altered and is, therefore, not a kind of material on which reliance can be placed. It is only with the aid of the confession that it can be accepted as incriminating the appellant. For, even the direct evidence of witnesses was not regarded by the High Court as worthy of credence, unaided by the confession. It is indeed the prosecution case that one bundle of ganja was found in the leg space in front of the front seat. Bearing in mind the fact that there were six persons in the car at the time and that the luggage boot in which the bundles were kept could be opened not merely with the keys which were recovered from the appellant but also with the keys which were recovered from the driver it is not possible to say, though the driver has been acquitted, that the appellant was in exclusive possession of the ganja which was found in the car except with the aid of the confessional statement, Ex. 3. It follows, ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment as are conferred on Officers of the Police is not sufficient for holding them to be police officers within the meaning of s. 25 of the Evidence Act because the powers of search etc., conferred on the former are of a limited character and have a limited object of safeguarding the revenues of the State. The majority, however expressed no opinion on the question whether officers of departments other than the police on whom the powers of an officer-incharge of a police station under ch. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are conferred are police officers or not for the purpose of s. 25 of the Evidence Act. The question whether an Excise Officer is a Police Officer was thus left open by them. It is precisely this question which falls for consideration in the present appeal. For, under s.78(3) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (2 of 1915) an Excise Officer empowered under s, 77, sub-s. (2) of that Act shall, for the purpose of s.156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be deemed to be an officer in charge of a police station with respect to the area to which his appointment as an Excise Officer extends. Sub-section (1) of s. 77 empowers the Collector of Excise to investigate w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al law or under any other special laws. But all the same, in so far as offenses under the Excise Act are concerned, there is no distinction whatsoever in the nature of the powers he exercises and those which a police officer exercises in relation to offenses which it is his duty to prevent and bring to light. It would be logical, therefore, to hold that a confession recorded by him during an investigation into an excise offence cannot reasonably be regarded as anything different from a confession to a police officer. For, in conducting the investigation he exercises the powers of a police officer and the act itself deems him to be a police officer, even though he does not belong to the police force constituted under the Police Act. It has been held by this court that the expression 'Police Officer in s. 25 of the Evidence Act is not confined to persons who are members of the regularly constituted police force. The position of an Excise Officer empowered under s. 77(2) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act is not analogous to that of a Customs Officer for two reasons. One is that the Excise Officer does not exercise any judicial powers just as the Customs Officer does under the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would not make him a police officer and, therefore, if such an officer records a confession it would not be hit by s. 25 of the Evidence Act, In our judgment what is pertinent to bear in mind for the purpose of determining as to who can be regarded a police officer for the purpose of this provision is not the totality of the powers which an officer enjoys but the kind of powers which the law enables him to exercise. The test for determining whether such a person is a police officer for the purpose of s. 25 of the Evidence Act would, in our judgment, be whether the powers of a police officer which are conferred on him or which are exercisable by him because he is deemed to be an officer in charge of a police station establish a direct or substantial relationship with the prohibition enacted by s. 25, that is, the recording of a confession. In our words, the test would be whether the powers are such as would tend to facilitate the obtaining by him of a confession from a suspect or a delinquent. If they do, then it is unnecessary to consider the dominant purpose for which he is appointed or the question as to what other powers he enjoys. These questions may perhaps be relevant for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge of a police station itself enables him to exercise authority over the arrested person and influence his conduct if he so wishes. Finally, a Customs Officer has power to seize anything liable to confiscation under the Act. But where he has seized anything he is liable, on demand of the person in charge of the thing so seized, to give him a statement in writing of the reasons for such seizure. Similarly where he, has arrested a person, he is bound to give to that person, if that person so demands, a statement' in writing disclosing the reasons for the arrest. No such duty is cast upon a police officer seizing an article or arresting a person. Chapter XVII deals with no other powers which could be said to be analogous to those of a police officer. The whole of that chapter shows that the other powers conferred upon a Customs Officer are such, as are necessary 'for preventing the commission of offenses under the Sea Customs Act and matters incidental thereto. It is worthy of note that the powers of investigation into offenses which a police officer enjoys are not conferred upon a Customs Officer. It is the possession of these powers which enables police officers and those wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n s. 25 of the Evidence Act is restricted to the members of the force or has a wider meaning. It is unnecessary to refer to those decisions because in Barkat Ram's case ([1962] 3 S. C. R. 338), it has clearly been held that the expression is not to be construed in a narrow way. We may, however, refer to certain decisions' in which the question whether an Excise Officer is a Police officer within the meaning of that section has been specifically considered. There is, however, no unanimity in those decisions. Thus in Ah Foong v. Emperor' (1918) I.L.R 46 Cal. 41), Harbhanjan Sao v. Emperor (1927) I.L.R. 54 Cal. 601), Matilall Kalwar v. Emperor (A.I.R. 1932 Cal 122), it was held that an Excise Officer is not a Police Officer. A contrary view was, however, taken in .Ibrahim Ahmed v. King Emperor (1931) I.L R. 58 Cal. 1260). The view taken in that case was affirmed by a Full Bench in Ameen Sharif v. Emperor (1934) I.L.R. 61 Cal 607). The view taken in the Full Bench case as well as in Ibrahim Ahmed's case (4), follows that of the Bombay High Court in Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed v. Emperor (1926) A.L.R. 51 Bom. 78). A similar view was also taken in Public Prosecutor v. C. Paramasiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he accused to construe it in its widest and most popular signification. (p. 216). The Full Bench pointed out that in Ah Foong's case (1918) I.L R. 46 Cal. 41), there was hardly any discussion of the question and further pointed out that Excise Officers had limited power in Bengal under the Opium Act of 1878 whereas in Bombay they exercised the powers of investigation and so on. The learned Chief Justice then observed : ' in my judgment, we should hold that as the Bombay Legislature has deliberately conferred upon these Abkari officers substantially all the powers of a Police Officer, they have thereby in effect made them Police Officers within the meaning of section 25, and that, accordingly, any confession made to such an officer in the course of his investigation under the Abkari Act or the Criminal Procedure Code is inadmissible in evidence. (p. 94) According to Shah J. s. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act embodies an important rule, which is to be given effect to as a matter of substance and not as a mere matter of form and that it is a perfectly fair interpretation of s. 25 to say that 'the Police Officer within the meaning of that section is an offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sense in which that expression is used in forensic language, great regard ought to be paid, in construing a statute enacted long ago to the construction which was put upon it by those who lived about the time or soon after it was made, because the meaning which a particular word or expression bore in those days may have got mixed up or blurred during the interval that has elapsed. From that point of view he regarded the decision in the case of Queen v. Hurribole Chunder Ghose (1876) I.L.R. Cal. 207), one of very great importance. We have already referred to that decision but we have not proceeded upon the view that while construing the relevant provision we should apply the principle followed in construing an ancient statute. The Evidence Act is of the year 1872 and in Senior Electric Inspector v. Laxminarayan Chopra ([1962] 3 S. C. R. 1462), this court while considering the question as to the meaning to be given to the expression Telegraph line occurring in s. 3, sub-s. (4) of the Telegraph Act, 1885, pointed out that the maxim contemporanea expositio as laid down by Coke was applied in construing ancient statutes but not in interpreting Acts which are comparatively modern. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reaches of the law, and detecting crime; construed as plural, the members of a police force; the constabulary of a locality.' All these duties which police officers discharge are but different phases of and means for carrying out the two more comprehensive duties, namely, of prevention of crimes and detection of crimes. It is true that it has nowhere been defined what minimum aggregation of functions will constitute a person a police officer within the meaning of section 25 of the Act, but the more comprehensive and popular signification of the term -'police officer , such as it was in 1861, is not difficult to appreciate from what was said by the legislature in the Police Act (V of 1861). Powers and duties of police officers under Act V of 1861 or under Act XXV of 1861 or under any other statute, or the different powers which different grades of police officers leave under any particular enactment, are mere matters of details worked out in order to enable the entire body, taken as a whole, to carry out the two essential duties entrusted to them, namely, the prevention and detection of crimes. These, two features of the duties which the police have to discharge and espec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judge agreed with the answer given by Marten C. J. in the case of Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed (1926) I.L.R. 51 Bom. 78), at p. 95 of the report to, meet a similar point. As regards the second point he said that, whereas police officers, by reason of section 22 of Act V of 1961, are to be always considered: on duty for the purposes of the Act, all revenue officers, on the other hand, are not police officers and it is only such of them as may be exercising the powers of police officers and only when exercising such powers that they may be regarded as police officers. We are in complete agreement with this view Mallik and Ghose JJ agreed with Mukherji J. But Jack J. did not accept Hurribole's case as an authority for holding that an Excise Officer is a Police Officer merely because he has certain powers of a police officer. His conclusion, however, was that the application of s. 25 of the Evidence Act, in the case of an excise officer should be limited to a confession made to him in the course of an investigation of an offence by virtue of section 74(3) of the Excise Act, which gives him the status of a police officer for the purposes of the investigation. In other words, what he means ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt reasons which I proceed to state : I do not consider the confession to be inadmissible in evidence as being made to a police officer. The admissibility of the alleged confession of the appellant depends on the question whether the Excise Inspector comes within the expression 'police officer' in s. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. I am of opinion that he does not. In State of Punjab v. Barkat Ram ([1962] 3 S.C.R. 338), this Court held that a customs officer is not a police officer within the meaning of s. 25 of the Evidence Act. The view was based on the following considerations : (1) The powers which a police officer enjoys are Rowers for the effective prevention and detection of crime in order to maintain law and order while a customs officer is not primarily concerned with the detection and punishment of crime committed by a person but is mainly interested in the detection and prevention of smuggling of goods and safeguarding the recovery of customs duties. (2) The mere fact that customs officers possess certain powers similar to those of police officers in regard to detection of infractions of customs laws, is not a sufficient ground for hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bject to such control as the State Government may direct, have the control of the administration of the Excise Department and the collection of the excise revenue; x x x x X Excise Commissioners arc appointed under s. 7(2)(a). Among the other officers appointed under the other clauses of subs (2) of s. 7 of the Act arc Superintendents of Excise, Inspectors of Excise and SubInspectors of Excise. The Superintendent of Excise exercises certain specified powers of the Collector to whom be is subordinate. 782 Chapter VIII deals with offenses and penalties. Section 63 provides for penalty for contempt of Court and reads : Every proceeding under this Act before a Collector, or before any officer, of such rank as the, State Government may, by notification prescribe, who is exercising powers of a Collector, shall be deemed to be a 'judicial proceeding' within the meaning of s: 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). Officers who may exercise the powers of a Collector are Superintendents of Excise, Sub-Divisional Officers and Deputy Collectors. Section 68 provides that the Collector or any Excise Officer specially empowered by the State Governme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to issue a warrant of arrest or a search warrant. Section 74 empowers an Excise Officer not below such rank as the State Government may, by notification, prescribe, to arrest certain offenders when such Officer has reason to believe that an offence had been committed or was being committed and when the obtaining of a search warrant might afford the offender an opportunity to escape or conceal evidence of the offence. The State Government has prescribed that Excise Officers not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector can exercise the power under this section. Section 77 is important for our purpose and is set out in full below: (1) A Collector may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate any offence punishable under this Act which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of the Collector's jurisdiction would have power to enquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, relating to the place of inquiry or trial. (2) Any other Excise Officer specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government in respect of all or any specified class of offenses punishable under this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is section or under section 68 of this Act, shall submit a report [which shall, for the purposes of section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (5 of 1898) be deemed to be a Policereport] to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to inquire into or try the case and empowered to take cognizance of offenses on Police reports. Section 79 deals with security and bail and empowers any Excise Officer not below such rank as the State Government may, by notification, prescribe, to release persons on bail or on their own bond. The State Government has prescribed that any Excise Officer not below the rank of SubInspector can exercise this power. Section. 80 provides that articles seized and persons arrested under the warrant of the Collector shall be produced before the Collector and that articles seized and persons arrested under the Act by persons or officers not having authority to release arrested persons on bail on their own bond, shall be produced before or forwarded to the Collector or an Excise Officer empowered under s. 77 (2) to investigate the offence, or to the nearest Excise Officer who has authority to release arrested persons on bail or on their own bond, or the offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the excise-revenue. Section 95 provides that no suit shall lie in any Civil Court against the Government or any Excise Officer for any act in good faith done or ordered to be done in pursuance of this Act or of any other law for the time being in force relating to the excise-revenue. Section 96 provides for limitations of suits and prosecutions and reads No Civil Court shall try any suit against the Government in respect of anything done, or alleged to have been done, in pursuance of this Act, and, except with the previous sanction of the State Government, no Magistrate shall take cognizance of any charge made against any Excise Officer under this Act or any other law relating to the excise-revenue or made against any other person under this Act, unless the suit or prosecution is instituted within six months after the date of the act complained of. The provisions of ss. 7, 89, 95 and 96 are sufficient to indicate that the action of Excise Officers under the Act and under any other law relating to exciserevenue is treated alike. The Act is, therefore, like the Sea Customs Act, primarily concerned with the collection of the excise-revenue. The object of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication. Further all proceedings before the Collector or Superintendent of Excise, S. D. 0. and Deputy Collector exercising the powers of the Collector are judicial proceedings within the meaning of s. 228 1. P. C. Section 85 (3) provides about the officers who and the circumstances in which they can be deemed to be police officers for the purposes of the Criminal Procedure Code. All Officers other than Collectors .who make arrests., searches or seizures under the Act are to be deemed 'police officers' for the purpose of the provisions relating to arrests, searches or seizures in the Criminal Procedure Code. It is therefore clear that the Legislature had in mind the police ,officers who perform the duties of making arrests, searches, and seizures, under the Criminal Procedure Code and provided that Excise officers or other persons authorized under the Act to perform these acts be deemed to be police officers for these purposes. It is therefore clear that the Legislature did not contemplate that Excise Officers performing other duties corresponding to the duties of the regular police officers be deemed police officers merely on account of their performing those duties. It f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed purpose. He is to be so considered for the purposes of s. 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and not for any other purpose. Now, s. 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads : (1) Any officer in charge of a police-station may, without the order of -a Magistrate investigate, any cognizable case which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station would have power to enquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XV relating to the place of enquiry or trial. (2) No proceeding of a police-officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one which such officer was not empowered under this section to investigate. (3) Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as abovementioned. What sub-s. (1) of s. 156 of the Code provides is already provided under sub-s. (2) of s. 77 of the Act which empowers such officers to investigate, without the order of a Magistrate, any such offence which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area to which such officer is appointed would have the power to enquire into or try under the aforesaid provisions. Sub-s. (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Sea Customs Act. Section 162 of the Code does not confer any power on a police officer. It only provides that any statement made by a person to a police officer in the course of an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code could be used for no purpose except for the purpose provided in that sub-section, at any enquiry in respect of that offence under investigation at the time when that statement was made. An investigation by the Excise Officer is not an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He may take similar steps during investigation which a police officer has to take, but that does not make his investigation an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code. Again, s. 163 has no application so far as the question of conferring power is concerned. It rather enjoins upon a police officer not to offer or make or cause to be offered or made, any such inducement, threat or promise as is mentioned in the Indian Evidence Act, section 24, and not to prevent any person from making a voluntary statement in the course of an investigation. Section 164, again, deals with the recording of statements and confessions by Magistrates during the investigation unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he second was that the expression 'police officer' in s. 25 of the Evidence Act should be construed according to the meaning that expression carried at or about the time that enactment was made and for that purpose, the view expressed in Hurribole's Case (1876) I.L.R. I Cal, 207), was not only accepted but was interpreted to mean that anyone whom the people at large looked upon as a police officer would be included in that definition. I would first consider Hurribole's Case (1), to which reference had been made in Barkat Ram's Case ([1962] 3 S.C.R. 338). In Hurribole's Case (1), Mr. Lambert who was a member of the regular police force and was so regarded outside Calcutta to which city the police Act of 1861 did not apply, was posted at Calcutta as Deputy Commissioner of Police. He was also invested with the powers of a Magistrate. The accused in that case made a confession originally to two policemen. It was taken down in writing. He was then brought before Mr. Lambert, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, at the police office. He affirmed the truth of his former statement to Mr. Lambert, who, in his capacity of a Magistrate, received and attested the statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Any such basis for construing this expression in s. 25 would be very slippery as there would be no real basic standard to form the foundation for such an interpretation. Another question raised in that case was that the confession was admissible in view of s. 26 of the Evidence Act which provided that no confession made by a person in police custody would be admissible in evidence unless it was made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, that Mr. Lambert was a Magistrate and that therefore the confession made to him was admissible in evidence. This contention was repelled on the ground that s. 25 of the Evidence Act was imperative and a confession made to a police officer under any circumstances was not admissible in evidence against the maker thereof. This means that Mr. Lambert's status as a Magistrate was completely ignored. The confession was not deemed to be taken by a Magistrate. It was taken to be made to a police officer as Mr. Lambert was a police officer on account of the service to which he belonged. It was merely as a Deputy Commissioner of Police that he enjoyed certain powers of a Magistrate. This view, therefore, can also be used in support of the contenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the various enactments in force and not necessarily under the general Police Act of 1861 or any special Police Act applicable to the Presidency towns, or those who, under certain statutory provisions be deemed to be police officers as, in that case, it would be the Legislature which itself would lay down the class of persons who would be treated to be police officers. I may say that it was not foreign to the Legislature in 1861 to make provisions with respect to certain persons being deemed to be officers of a certain class. Historically, I do not find the expression 'Police officer' or 'Police' to be a vague one. In 1793, a number of Regulations were made by the Governor General in Council. They dealt with many a subject connected with the administration of the territory under the control of the East India Company. The preamble of Regulation XXII of 1793 indicates that the object of that Regulation was to establish an efficient police throughout the country whereby offenders may be deprived of all hope of eluding the pursuit of officers of justice as the clause in the engagements of the landholders and farmers of land by which they were bound to keep the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 3, however, provides that the superintendence of the police throughout a general police district shall vest in and shall be exercised by the State Government to which such district is subordinate. This does not speak of the superintendence of the police force or the police establishment, but puts the entire police within the State under the control of the Government. The administration of such entire police is vested in the Inspector General of Police by s. 4 and within a district 'is vested in the District Superintendent. These officers exercise no administrative control over the Excise Officers. Section 47 makes it lawful for the State Government to declare. that any authority which is being exercised by a Magistrate of the District over any village watchman or other village police officer for the purpose of police shall be exercised, subject to the general control of the Magistrate of the district, by the District Superintendant of Police. This is a clear indication that the Act purported to bring the entire police whether controlled under the Act or not, within its purview in the area where the Act be in force. It was on account of the various persons under seve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther empowered the Collector or other officers entrusted with the charge of akbarry mohaul to cause the persons charged with or suspected of offences under the Regulation to be apprehended so that a regular enquiry might be made into the merits of the case. Officers in charge of the abkarry mohaul were given power under s. XXIII to issue search warrants. Section XXXI made the collectors of land revenue entitled to a commission on the net amount of the abkarry revenue realised by them. Act XXI of 1856 repealed Regulation X of 1813. Its title is 'An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to the Abkaree Revenue in the Presidency of Fort William in Bengal' and the preamble states : Whereas it is expedient that the laws relating to the manufacture of spirits and the sale of spirituous and fermented liquors and intoxicating drugs, and the collection of the revenue derived therefrom, should be consolidated and amended : It is enacted as follows. Section II says that the Collectors of land revenue will be in charge of the collection of the revenue arising from the manufacture of spirits and the sale of spirits, liquors and intoxicating drugs. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cers. It was in 1861, as already stated, that the 'Criminal Procedure Code, by s. 148, provided that no confession made to a Police officer would be used in evidence against an accused person. In view of the provisions of the first Regulation XXII of 1793 dealing with the creation of the Police under the direct control of the Government and of the Abkaree Department governed by Regulation XXXIV of 1793 up to 1856, it is not possible to say in my opinion, that the Legislature when using the expression 'police officer' in s. 148 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1861, intended that expression to include the Abkaree officers who had powers of investigation, though without any reference to the procedure to be followed in carrying out the investigation necessary for the purpose of establishing the offences under the Abkaree Act against the alleged culprits. It is also clear from certain provisions referred to above that the Legislature did state in clear terms that certain officers of the other departments would be deemed to be Abkaree officers in certain circumstances. It follows therefore that if the Legislature had intended to use the expression 'police officers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the use of the words of the section; those words, must be followed. Fazl Ali, J. agreed with his views and stated at p. 56: It appears to me that the distinction between a person who is nothing but a police officer and one who is primarily not a police officer but merely invested with the powers of a police officer is material and cannot be ignored for the purpose of construing section 25 of the Evidence Act. He pertinently remarked at p.57: To take this view would, in my opinion, be to ignore the popular meaning of the term 'police officer' and enlarge unduly the scope of the section. There was nothing to prevent the framers of the Evidence Act from saying expressly that confessions made to a police officer as well as those persons who are for the time being and for certain limited purposes invested with the powers of a police officer arc inadmissible in evidence. Agarwala J., expressed the opinion that the expression 'police officer' in s. 25 of the Evidence Act referred to the police officers enrolled in or appointed as members of the police force. I agree with respect with the wider view taken by the learned Chief Justic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
