Judgement

NARASIMHAM, C. J. :- The question referred to the Full Bench by a Division Bench of this Court is:

"Whether a confession made to an Excise Officer exercising the powers of a Police Officer is a confession made to a Police Officer and is not admissible under S. 25 of the Indian Evi. Act."

The referring Bench noticed the conflict of decisions of the various High Courts on this question and thought that it should be definitely settled once for all, so far as this Court and the Courts subordinate to it are concerned. In a Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court reported in Radhakishun Marwari v. Emperor, AIR 1932 Pat 293 (SB) (A) it was held that an Excise Officer exercising powers under the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act read with the Dangerous Drugs Act, was not a Police Officer" and that a confession made to him by an accused person was therefore admissible in evidence not being hit by S. 25 of the Evidence Act.

There was an earlier Full Bench decision of the Bombay High Court, reported in Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed v. Emperor, AIR 1927 Bom 4 (B) to the contrary, but the Patna High Court did not accept the correctness of that Bombay decision. Subsequently, however, a Full Bench of