”19. Even within one police station it is not uncommon to find several officers charged with different duties like the officer for law and order, the Officer for crimes investigation and the Officer for traffic regulations. But when any one of them becomes an officer in charge of a police station or an Officer superior in rank, he automatically gets the powers under Chapter XII of the Code. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Police Officers of the Vigilance Commission in view of the Government Notification dated June 2, 1981 are not any less Police Officers for the purpose of S. 190(1)(b) of the Code. The decision of the Supreme Court in Rajaram Jaiswal case would further dispel the doubts, if any, in the matter. Therein the question arose whether the Inspectors and Sub-Inspectors of Excise under the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act with powers to arrest, investigate and obtain statements with a view to facilitate the investigation of the offences under the Excise Act would be considered as Police Officers and whether, the confession made to them would be relevant under S. 25 of the Evidence Act. S. 25 of the Evidence Act provides, that no confession made to a Police Officer shall be proved as against the person accused of any offence. There a confession was made by a person to Excise Officer and not to a Police Officer in the sense that he did not belong to the Police Force or Police Establishment. But under S. 78(3) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 an Excise Officer empowered under S. 17 of that Act was deemed to be an officer in charge of a Police Station with respect to the area to which his appointment as Excise Officer extends. Considering the scope and effect of that notification and the power conferred on the Excise Inspectors, the Supreme Court observed at page 832, para-10:
