( 1 ) THE following question has been referred to the Full Bench by the Division Bench for consideration :-"whether the extra-judicial confession made by an accused to the Kotwar is admissible in evidence?" the Division Bench found that there is some controversy in the decisions of this Court regarding the admissibility of a statement made by an accused person to the Kotwar having authority to arrest an accused person and the controversy should be set at rest as the only evidence available in the case is the extra-judicial confession made by the accused to the Kotwar in the presence of others.

( 2 ) SECTION 25 of the Evidence Act provides that no confession made to a Police Officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. The word 'police Officer' has not been defined in the Act. The Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Barkat Ram AIR 1962 SC 276 has held as under :-"the Police Act, 1861 (5 of 1861), is described as an Act for the regulation of police, and is thus an Act for the regulation of that group of officers who come within the word 'police' whatever meaning be given to that word. The preamble of the Act further says: 'whereas it is expedient to re-organise the police and to make it a more efficient instrument for the prevention and detection of crime, it is enacted as follows'. This indicates that the police is the instrument for the prevention and detection of crime which can be said to be the main object and purpose of having the police. Sections 23 and 25 lay down the duties of the police officers and S. 20 deals with the authority they can exercise. They can exercise such authority as is provided for a police officer under the Police Act and any Act for regulating criminal procedure. The authority given to police officers must naturally be to enable them to discharge their duties efficiently. Of the various duties mentioned in S. 23, the more important duties are to collect and communicate intelligence affecting the public peace, to prevent the commission of offences and public nuisances and to detect and bring offenders to justice and to apprehend all persons whom the police officer is legally authorised to apprehend. It is clear, therefore in view of the nature of the duties imposed on the police officers, the nature of the authority conferred and the purpose of the Police Act, that the powers which the police officers enjoy are powers for the effective prevention and detection of crime in order to maintain law and order. "there seems to be no dispute that a person who is a member of the police force is a police officer. A person is a member of the police force when he holds his office under any of the Acts dealing with the police. A person may be member of the police in any other country. Officers of the police in the erstwhile Indian States and an officer of the police of a foreign country have been held in certain decided cases to be police officers within the meaning of S. 25 of the Evidence Act. There is no denying that these persons are police officers and are covered by that expression in S. 25. That expression is not restricted to the police officers of the police forces enrolled under the Police Act of 1861. The word 'police' is defined in S. 1 and is said to include all persons who shall be enrolled under the Act. No doubt this definition is not restrictive, as it uses the expression'includes', indicating thereby that person other than those enrolled under that Act can also be covered by the word 'police'. Sections 17 and 18 of the Police Act provide for the appointment of special police officers who are not enrolled under the Act but are appointed for special occasions and have the same powers, privileges and protection and are liable to perform the same duties as the ordinary officers of the police. Section 21 also speaks of officers who are not enrolled as police officers and in such categories mentions hereditary or other village police officers. The words 'police off