Taken from the Blog: What is Section 27 Evidence Act – Recovery or Discovery?

Jojy George Koduvath.

Section 27 of the Evidence Act

Section 27 of the Evidence Act reads-

• “27. How much of information received from accused may be proved. Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.”

Sec. 27, Evidence Act substantially directs–

• The ‘information‘ (or disclosure) from the accused that led to “discovery” may “be proved“.

How the substantial part be introduced in court is stated in the first portion of Sec. 27. It says-

• What is to be proved by Sec. 27 is the fact deposed by the IO in court; and
• it must be as to the discovery on ‘information‘ (or disclosure) from the accused.

Pulukuri Kotayya v. King ­Emperor, AIR 1947 PC 67, the locus-classicus decision on this subject says what are the facts to be deposed by the IO and what are to be Discovered or Proved under Sec. 27.

• They are-
  • (a) Place (Place of concealment of object – a tangible matter) and
  • (b) Knowledge (knowledge of accused as to concealment– an intangible matter.)

“Discovery” under Sec. 27 is to be Proved (primarily) by the Deposition of IO

• ‘Information‘ (given by the accused) and the ‘fact‘ (of discovery) required under Sec. 27 are to be proved in a court (primarily) by the deposition of the IO, before the court–
  • (a) as to the information given by the accused to him (IO) and
  • (b) as to discovery of the (i) place, (ii) object and (iii) knowledge of the accused,
• supported by-
  • (1) disclosure statement of accused (written by IO) and
  • (2) proof as to two tangible things –
    • (i) place (by mahazar prepared in presence of witnesses) and
    • (ii) object (recovery of original object or other proper evidence).