Admissibility of confession before customs officers and recovery evidence under NDPS law supported the conviction.

Recovery of opium from a briefcase beneath the appellant's seat was found reliable on the testimony of customs officers present at the checking. The absence of independent witnesses did not weaken the prosecution where the occurrence was away from the bazar and no material showed the availability of neutral witnesses. A confession made before officers empowered under Section 53 of the NDPS Act was treated as admissible because they were not police officers for Section 25 of the Evidence Act. The appellant's own statement also admitted possession of the contraband, so the conviction and sentence were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was liable to be set aside on the ground that the prosecution relied mainly on official witnesses, no independent witness was examined, and the appellant's confession before customs officers was inadmissible.

Analysis: The recovery of 4 kg 200 gms of opium from a briefcase found beneath the seat occupied by the appellant was supported by the testimony of customs officers who were present at the checking. The absence of independent witnesses did not discredit the prosecution case where the occurrence was at a place away from the bazar and there was no material to show the availability of neutral witnesses. The officers were not police officers for the purpose of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, and a confession made before officers empowered under Section 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was admissible. The appellant's own statement admitted possession of the contraband and the recovery evidence was found trustworthy.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were upheld and the challenge to the prosecution evidence failed.

---