The Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act was enacted in 1985 with the intent to curb crimes relating to narcotic drugs which affect the entire society. The scheme of the act has gone through various transformations by way of amendments as well as judicial interpretations. The concept of conscious possession, strict liability and admissibility of confession are one of the highlights of the scheme of NDPS Act which are heavily discussed till date. Plethora of cases discussed the concept of possession of narcotic drugs. In the case of Tofan Singh v. State of Tamilnadu, the Supreme Court has ruled on a long-pending question of law on whether statements recorded under Section 67 NDPS Act can be admissible as confessional statements during criminal trials. The Apex court replied this question in negative. This becomes a landmark development and the issue ofvalidity of confessional statements before various officials under NDPS Act needs to be studied further. It becomes important to study that how the pious principles of the Constitution of India along with the Law of Evidence is implemented by the apex court. The intent of inadmissibility of confessional statement before or in presence of police officer is well founded in the light of authoritative position of the Police Officer in relation to the accused. It is also based on the possibilities of forceful extorting of confessional statement by the police officers acting under color of their office. Various revenue officials and customs officials are also given authority to act under NDPS act. Therefore, in the light of judgment of the Apex court, the study of the validity of confessional statements before all such officials becomes important.

.