LAW OF EVIDENCE

RECOVERY OF ANY MATERIAL

OBJECT BY POLICE UPON
INFORMAION GIVEN BY OTHERS

SUBMITTED TO DR. SITA RAMA RAO.

(FACULTY OF EVIDENCE LAW)

SUBMITTED BY-
DEEKSHA TRIPATI
ROLL N0:-1126
4TH SEMESTER

1 | Page
 ACKNOWLEDMENT
I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible without

the kind support and help of many individuals. I would like to extend my sincere

thanks to all of them.

I am highly indebted to my Evidence law teacher, Dr. Sita Rama Rao, for his guidance

and constant supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the

project & also for her support in completing the project.

I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & my friends for their kind

co-operation and encouragement which help me in completion of this project.

I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to seniors for giving me such

attention and time.

My thanks and appreciations also go to my colleagues in developing the project and

people who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

Thanking them all !

Deeksha Tripathi.

2 | Page
 INDEX
1. Introduction.......................................................................................04

2. Principle of Section 27 .....................................................................06

3. Scope of Section 27 ..........................................................................07

4. Example of Section 27......................................................................08

5. Essentials of Section 27 ...................................................................10

6. Constitutional validity of Section 27...............................................11

7. Object of Section 27 ................. .......................................................13

8. Validity of the information whereby discovered may be

proved ........................................................................................................
...15

9. Conclusion.........................................................................................16

10. Bibliography....................................................................................26

INDRODUCTION

3 | Page
Section 24 to 26 states the rule that exclusion of confessions. Section 24 forbids

confessions caused by inducement , etc. Section 25 hits confessions made to a police

office. While section 26 excludes confessions made by the accused while in police

custody.

But although such improperly obtained confessions are inadmissible under these

provisions, they may lead to the discovery of the facts, things, documents, etc, in

consequence of some information contained in the confession made by the accused in

the custody. When a statement leads to the discovery of some dead body, weapon or

ornament, the presumption of falsity attached to the excluded confessions disappears

and that part of the information which relates distinctly to the facts.

Hence in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Devoman Upadhaya, AIR 1960 has observed that

section 27 is founded on the principle that even though the evidence relating to

confessional or other statements made by a person, while he is in custody of a police

officer is tainted and therefore inadmissible, if the truth of the information given by

him is assured by the discovery of a fact, it may be presumed to be untainted and is

therefore, declared provable in so far as it distinctly relates to the fact thereby

discovered

PRINCIPLE OF SECTION 27

4 | Page
Section 27 lays down that during the period of investigation or during police custody

any information is given by the accused of an offence to the police officer that leads to

discover any fact, may be proved whether such information amounts to confession or

not, and obtained under inducement, threat or promise. 1 Section 27 is by way of a

proviso to Sections 25 and 26 and a statement even by way of confession made in

police custody which distinctly relates to the fact discovered is admissible in evidence

against the accused.2

Under sections 24, 25 and 26 a confession which is inadmissible would be admissible

under section 27 subject to discoveries of facts on the basis of information given by

the accused. Section 27 is by way of proviso to Sections 25 to 26 and a statement even

by way of confession made in police custody which is distinctly relates to the facto

discovered in admissible in evidence agreement the accused.3

SCOPE OF SECTION 27

1 Text book on law of evidence- Chief justice M. Monir , Universal Law Publishing, 2010

2 http://www.lawnotes.in/Indian_Evidence_Act,_1872

3 Law of evidence- Dr. V Krishanmachari, S Gogoi and co., 2011.

5 | Page
There are two exceptions laid down in the Evidence Act so far the admissibility of

confession made by an accused is concerned. 4 First, exception relates to when

confession is made by the accused in immediate presence of a magistrate (Section 26)

and the other has been mentioned in Section 27 i.e. when the confession leads to

discoveries of facts. The section permits the proof of all kinds of information whether

contained in a confession or not, and therefore goes beyond the provisions of Sections

25 and 26.5

Section 27 renders information admissible on the ground that the discovery of the fact

pursuant to a statement made by a person in custody is a guarantee of truth of the

statement made by him and the legislature has chosen to make on the ground an

exception to the rule prohibiting proof of such statement.6

4 Law of evidence- Dr. V Krishanmachari, S Gogoi and co., 2011.

5 http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shareyouressays.com.

6 State of Uttar Pradesh v. demon Upadhaya, AIR 1960 SC 1125

6 | Page
 EXAMPLE OF SECTION 27
A was arrested by the police officer on a charge of murder. A confessed to the

police officer that he had committed murder with a dagger what he had hidden in the

neighbouring field. On the basis of such information the police officer recovered the

dagger from the field. The statement regarding hiding of dagger to the police officer is

relevant.

Under the section, excepting the confession relating to recoveries of facts no such

guarantee or assurance attaches to the rest of the statement which may be indirectly or

remotely related to the fact discovered. It arises by reason of fact that information

given by the accused exhibited knowledge or mental awareness of information as to

its existence at particular place. Fact discovered, therefore, has to be a combination of

both the elements, that is, physical object and mental condition.7

7 Text book on law of evidence- Chief justice M. Monir , Universal Law Publishing, 2010

7 | Page
 ESSENTIALS OF SECTION 27
The following conditions are necessary for the application of the Section 27.

1. The fact must have been discovered in consequence of information received from

the accused.

2. The person giving information must be accused of an offence.

3. He must be in custody of a police officer.

4. That portion only of the information which relates distinctly to the fact discovered

can be proved.

5. The discovery of fact must relate to the commission of crime in question.

6. Before the statements proved somebody must depose that some article was

discovered in consequence of the information received from the accused. 8

In Anter Singh v. State of Rajanthan9 it was held that the first condition necessary for

bringing section 27 into operation is the discovery of a fact, albeit a relevant fact, in

consequence of the information received from a person accused of an offence. 10

The second is that the discovery of such fact must be disposed to.

8 http://hanumant.com/index.php/academics/law-notes/15-law-of-evidence.html

9 AIR 2004 SC 2865

10 Law of evidence- Dr. V Krishanmachari, S Gogoi and co., 2011.

8 | Page
The third is that the time of the receipt of the information the accused must be in

police custody.11

The lat but the most important condition is that, only so much of the information as

relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered is admissible. The rest of the

information has to be excluded.

11Text book on law of evidence- Chief justice M. Monir , Universal Law Publishing,
2010

9 | Page
 CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF
SECTION 27
In State of U.P. v Deoman the validity of Section 27 of the Evidence Act was

challenged on the ground that it was offending Article 14 of the Constitution of

India.12 In appeal the High Court declared Section 27 to be unconstitutional as it

created unjustifiable discrimination between persons in custody and persons out of

custody.13 Further appeal was made by the State of U.P. against the judgment of the

High Court in the Supreme Court. It was held by the Supreme Court that the

distinction between persons in custody and persons out of custody had little

practical significance. By majority decision the Section 27 was declared to be

constitutional and the conviction awarded by the Session judge was restored.14

The legal position therefore remains as inconsistent as ever in spite of the decision of

the Supreme Court viz., that while information given by a person in police custody

leading to discovery of a fact may be proved, such information, coming from a person

not in custody is not probable though both satisfy the same test of relevancy provided

in Section 27, e.g. the discovery of a fact.15

12 http://www.lawnotes.in/Indian_Evidence_Act,_1872

13 http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shareyouressays.com.

14 Law of evidence- Dr. V Krishanmachari, S Gogoi and co., 2011.

15 http://hanumant.com/index.php/academics/law-notes/15-law-of-evidence.html

10 | P a g e
 OBJECT OF SECTION 27
Basic object of the section is to provide evidence for admission and such evidence

relates to some sort of discovery of fact. It would appear that under Section 27 as it

stands in order to render evidence holding to discovery of on fact admissible, the

information must come from any accused in custody of the police. It is well settled

that recovery of object is not discovery of fact envisaged in the section. Recovery so

made prusuant to discovery statement can be relied upon to complete chain of events

relating to crime.16

However, where there is direct evidence by the eye-witness non-recovery of the

offending car said to have been used by the accused will be no ground to disbelieve

otherwise the credit worthy evidence of the prosecution witnesses.17

Where the recovery of panchnama of the sticks, the alleged crime article, had no

mention that the sticks had any marks of blood, the evidence of recovery of the sticks

cannot constitute incriminating evidence against the accused. Evidence of recovery

cannot be relied upon for conviction sofar as recovery of the sword as concerned, the

same was not sent for any examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory and the

report if any was not exhibited and even no question in that regard was put to the

accused while he was examined under section 313 of the Code.(Cr. P.C.). Non

discovery of weapon sickle does not go to discreet the witness.

16 http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shareyouressays.com.

17 http://www.lawnotes.in/Indian_Evidence_Act,_1872

11 | P a g e
Discovery statement of the accused and recovery of revolver in pursuant thereto is an

important circumstance against the accused which can be taken into consideration.

Unless the disclosure statement is proved, the consequential recovery at the instance

of the accused is not covered within the framework of Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

Where in a plan an unknown woman was raped and her dead body was buried,

disclosure statement of accused persons pointing out the place of rape was not

admissible.18

18 Text book on law of evidence- Chief justice M. Monir , Universal Law Publishing, 2010

12 | P a g e
 VALIDITY OF INFORMATION
WHEREBY DISCOVERED MAY
BE PROVED
Discovery of facts, however important, does not render admissible that the accused

informed in connection with discovery. So much of the information which distinctly

relate to the facts thereby discovered is admissible. The section seems to be leased on

the view that if a fact is actually discovered in consequence of information given,

some guarantee is afforded.19 Thereby that the information was true and accordingly

can be safely allowed to be given in evidence. However, since discovery of fact as a

result of information from the accused is not admissible under its relevancy is

established by other evidence showing the connection between the fact discovered

and the offence charged with the accused. 20 Articles discovered by another house

owner on the information provided by the accused were held to be discovered at the

instance of the accused.

Therefore, the extent of information admitted should be consistent with

understandability. What was admissible in evidence is only that part which would

come within the purview of Section 27 of the Evidence Act and not the rest. Mere

19 http://hanumant.com/index.php/academics/law-notes/15-law-of-evidence.html

20 http://www.lawnotes.in/Indian_Evidence_Act,_1872

13 | P a g e
statement that the accused led the police and the witnesses to the place where he had

concealed the articles is not indicative of the information given.

The basic idea embedded in Section 27 of the Evidence Act is the doctrine of

confirmation by subsequent event. In criminal conspiracy and murder case the

investigation was able to locate STD booth from where the accused talked with others.

This was discovered at instance of known accused persons. It was held that the

evidence of witness clearly proved recoveries and discovers.21

CONCLUSION
21 http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shareyouressays.com.

14 | P a g e
A reading of section 27 of the act makes it clear that what is allowed to be proved is

the information of such party thereof as relates distinctly to the fact thereby

discovered.

The very language of this section indicates statement by an individual accused and the

discovery in pursuance of such statement. A joint statement followed by a joint

recovery is inadmissible.

It is obvious that the provisions of section 27 of the Evidence Act are not restricted to

confessions, but its net is much wider that can contain all the statements containing

information that lead to the discovery of fact.

The section seems to be based on the view that if a fact is actually discovered in

consequence of information given, some guarantee is afforded thereby that the

information was true and accordingly can be safely allowed to be given in evidence.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

15 | P a g e
Books referred:

Text book on law of evidence- Chief justice M. Monir , Universal Law

Publishing, 2010
Law of evidence- Dr. V Krishanmachari, S Gogoi and co., 2011.

Websites referred:

http://hanumant.com/index.php/academics/law-notes/15-law-of-evidence.html
https://shuklagirjesh.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/summary-of-indian-evidence-
act-1872-part-ist/
http://www.lawnotes.in/Indian_Evidence_Act,_1872
http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.shareyouressays.com.

16 | P a g e