Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Monday, 03 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2020-10-29 allowed

Tofan Singh vs State of Tamil Nadu

Bench: 3 — R.F. Nariman, Indira Banerjee, <UNKNOWN>

In Brief

The Supreme Court decided that officers designated under Section 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act qualify as 'police officers' within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Consequently, confessional statements made to such officers cannot be relied upon as evidence under Section 25. The Court also held that statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, which is merely a power to call for information during preliminary enquiry, cannot be used as substantive confessional evidence. Section 53A limits the relevance of such statements to specific exceptional circumstances, with corroboration required. The overruling of prior judgments (Raj Kumar Karwal and Kanhaiyalal) reflects the Court's view that the NDPS Act, being a penal statute dealing with serious crimes, must provide constitutional safeguards comparable to those in the CrPC.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Law Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Evidence Law Police Powers Confessional Statements Fundamental Rights Constitutional Law Criminal Procedure

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login