The question that is raised in this petition is whether in view of Madras Act XXXII of 1951, which was introduced as an amendment to section 20 of the Opium Act (Central Act I of 1878), a confession made to a Prohibition officer is admissible or not.

Section 20-A reads as follows:

“The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, invest any officer of the Prohibition department, or every officer belonging to any specified class in that department, with the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of offences under this Act.”

This High Court has in a series of decisions held that an Excise Officer under the Madras Abkari Act is not a Police-officer within the meaning of section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. (Vide Mahalakshmayya v. Emperor1, Doraiswami Nadar v. Emperor2, Public Prosecutor v. Marimuthu Goundan3and Mayilvahanam, In re.4) But the Calcutta High Court by a Full Bench decision in Ameer Sheriff v. Emperor5, has held that an Excise-officer who in the conduct of an investigation of an offence against the Excise, exercises the powers conferred by the Code of Criminal Procedure upon an officer in charge of a polic