Presumption as to documents in certain cases
Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 deals with presumption as to documents in certain cases. Where any document-- (i) is produced or furnished by any person or has been seized from the custody or control of any person, in either case, under this Act or under any other law, or (ii) has been received from any place outside India (duly authenticated by such authority or person and in such mann The Act came into force on 14 Nov 1985.
Where any document--
(i) is produced or furnished by any person or has been seized from the custody or control of any person, in either case, under this Act or under any other law, or
(ii) has been received from any place outside India (duly authenticated by such authority or person and in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government) in the course of investigation of any offence under this Act alleged to have been committed by a person,
and such document is tendered in any prosecution under this Act in evidence against him, or against him and any other person who is tried jointly with him, the court shall--
(a) presume, unless the contrary is proved, that the signature and every other part of such document which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person or which the court may reason ably assume to have been signed by, or to be in the handwriting of, any particular person, is in that persons handwriting; and in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was executed or attested by the person by whom it purports to have been so executed or attested;
(b) admit the document in evidence, notwithstanding that it is not duly stamped, if such document is otherwise admissible in evidence;
(c) examine any person acquainted with the facts and circumcontrary is proved, the truth of the contents of such document.
Section 66, The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act 61 of 1985).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Mohd. Aslam Khan vs Narcotics Control Bureau
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt, through independent corroborating evidence, that an accused person owns and is in actual possession of a premises from which contraband is seized. Retracted confessions, uncorroborated documents without established authenticity, and circumstantial information alone are insufficient to prove such ownership. The burden rests entirely on the prosecution to independently establish these foundational facts through proper evidence such as documents from concerned authorities, identification by independent witnesses, or expert verification, before invoking procedural provisions like Section 66 of NDPS Act. Possession of contraband at a location does not, by itself, establish ownership of that location.
On this section: Relates to admissibility of documents seized from custody or control of a person. Court held that this section cannot be invoked unless ownership and possession of the premises are first independently established
-
Tofan Singh vs The State of Tamil Nadu through the Ineliigence Officer
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Officers designated under Section 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are 'police officers' within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Consequently, any confessional statement made to such officers is barred from being used as evidence under Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Additionally, a statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in the trial of an offence under the NDPS Act, as Section 67 is limited to calling for information and examining persons during an inquiry antecedent to investigation, not for recording confessions as substantive evidence.
On this section: Presumption as to documents in certain cases under NDPS Act
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Made under this section, and citing it
1 instrument names this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
Questions about Section 66
What have the courts held on Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act?
Mohd. Aslam Khan vs Narcotics Control Bureau (20 Feb 1996) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Relates to admissibility of documents seized from custody or control of a person. Court held that this section cannot be invoked unless ownership and possession of the premises are first independently established. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 1996 to 2020.
How do I find court cases under Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: NDPS Act 66, section 66 NDPS Act, section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. People searching for it also type 66 ndps act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Mohd. Aslam Khan vs Narcotics Control Bureau (20 Feb 1996).
What should I read with Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. One instrument names it without being made under it, most recently THE NARCOTIC DRUGS SUBSTANCES AND PSYCHOTROPIC RULES, 1985I (1985).
When did Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act come into force?
Section 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, cited as NDPS Act 66, came into force on 14 Nov 1985, having been enacted on 16 Sep 1985. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions1747 words
- 68B. Definitions819 words
- 9. Power of Central Government to permit, control and regulate816 words
- 36A. Offences triable by Special Courts631 words
- 10. Power of State Government to permit, control and regulate568 words
- 42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorisation507 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.