What is the evidentiary value of statements/confessions recorded by NDPS officers u/s 67? Whether NDPS officers u/s 53 can record statement/confession u/s 67? Whether conviction can be based on such statement/confession recorded u/s 67 by NDPS officers?

Key Points: - Tofan Singh convicted under Sections 8(c), 21(c), and 29 of NDPS Act for possessing 5.250 kg heroin intended for export, with conviction upheld by High Court (!) [5000258750002]. - Prosecution relied on statements under Section 67 NDPS Act recorded by Intelligence Officer, which appellant retracted claiming coercion [5000258750006] (!) . - Trial court and High Court rejected defenses including retracted confessions, Section 50 non-compliance, and non-examination of drivers, upholding conviction [5000258750015][5000258750016]. - Core issue: Whether NDPS officers under Section 53 are "police officers" under Section 25 Evidence Act, making Section 67 statements inadmissible (!) (!) [5000258750025]. - Court noted conflicting precedents like Kanhaiyalal (officers not police) vs. Noor Aga (customs officers are police), distinguishing NDPS from Customs/Excise Acts [5000258750027][5000258750031]. - Section 67 empowers officers under Section 42 to call for information/examine persons, but its confessional value and police officer status require authoritative decision (!) (!) . - Issues referred to larger Bench: NDPS officers as police officers, evidentiary value of Section 67 statements, and use for conviction [5000258750039][5000258750040]. - Appellant granted bail after serving over 9 years, pending larger Bench decision [5000258750043].

What is the evidentiary value of statements/confessions recorded by NDPS officers u/s 67?

Whether NDPS officers u/s 53 can record statement/confession u/s 67?

Whether conviction can be based on such statement/confession recorded u/s 67 by NDPS officers?