https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290313 Cancellation of bail granted to the respondent was sought by the Intelligence Officer, DRI, based on the admissibility of confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and the application of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The court determined that the confessional statement was not hit by Article 20(3) as the respondent was not considered an accused at the time of recording. The Division Bench upheld the admissibility of statements made by DRI or Customs Officers, emphasizing they are not police officers. The matter was referred back to the Single Judge for further proceedings. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:37:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290313 Cancellation of bail granted to the respondent was sought by the Intelligence Officer, DRI, based on the admissibility of confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and the application of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The court determined that the confessional statement was not hit by Article 20(3) as the respondent was not considered an accused at the time of recording. The Division Bench upheld the admissibility of statements made by DRI or Customs Officers, emphasizing they are not police officers. The matter was referred back to the Single Judge for further proceedings. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290313