“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-X]

Q.46 A weapon is recovered on the basis of the statement made by the accused during the investigation of another case. Whether it is admissible under Section 27?Ans. Yes. (See – • State of Rajasthan v. Bhup Singh – 1997 (10) SCC 675 - A. S. Anand, K. T. Thomas – JJ ; • Para 37 of Mohan Lal v. State of Rajasthan (2015) 6 SCC 222 = AIR 2015 SC 2098 - Dipak Misra, S. A. Bobde...

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-IX]

Q.41 The accused in a murder case when arrested by the police makes the following statement:- “That knife is concealed beneath the tiles of the cowshed of my neighbor Antony. If I am taken there I can take out the same and produce before you” Does not the above statement contain the element of criminality tending to connect the accused with the crime ? Ans. No. The...

Supreme Court Summarises Factors For Deciding Remission Applications

On Monday, the Supreme Court not only set aside the remission of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case but also provided detailed guidelines for considering remission applications. The top court highlighted key factors that must be taken into account, offering an illuminating roadmap for evaluating such pleas under the Code of Criminal Procedure.This verdict was handed out by a bench of Justices...

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-VIII]

Q.36 Whether an “extra-judicial confession” made by the accused to TV and press reporters in an interview arranged by the police while the accused was in the immediate presence of the police or in police custody, is admissible? Ans. No, such “extra-judicial confession” will be hit by Section 26 of the Evidence Act. If the statement was made to a police officer, it will...

Four Conditions To Invoke Section 27 Of Indian Evidence Act : Supreme Court Explains

The Supreme Court (on January 03), in a crucial judgment with respect to section 27 of the Evidence Act, reiterated the three conditions to invoke this provision. While doing so, the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti relied upon Mohmed Inayatullah v. State of Maharashtra., (1976) 1 SCC 828. The first condition is the discovery of a fact. This fact should be...

Major Changes Introduced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

Recently, the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita (BNS) has received Presidential assent, and it will replace the 163-year-old Indian Penal Code. However, the Central government is yet to notify the date of enforcement.In Rajya Sabha, the three bills ( Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita, to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the...

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-VII]

Q.31 What is the test for making “conduct” admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act ? Ans. In order to be admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act, the conduct of the accused should have a close nexus with the “fact in issue” or “relevant fact”. Explanation 1 to Section 8 makes the position clear. (Vide paras 205 and 206 of State (NCT of Delhi) v....

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-VI]

Q.26 Whether a “confession” made while in “police custody” is admissible in evidence and is there any exception ? Ans. No. A mere confession made by an accused person to a police officer cannot be proved against such accused person in view of the bar under Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Likewise, a confession made while in the custody of a police officer also cannot be...

Judicial Service Exams: Question And Answers (MCQs) Based On Latest Judgements- PART-1

MCQs based on Current SC Judgments- October 20231. In which case did the Supreme Court rule that mere non-cooperation with summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA Act 2002 is not sufficient to warrant arrest?A. Pankaj Bansal v. Union of IndiaB. Sanjana Kumari v. Vijay KumarC. State Bank of India & Ors v. P ZandengaD. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd v. State of MPAnswer: A. Pankaj Bansal...

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-V]

Q.21 At the time of his arrest the accused was seen wearing the same blood stained shirt which he was wearing 2 or 3 days ago when the murder was committed. The defence argues that it was unlikely that the accused would continue to wear the same shirt. Whether the defence argument can be accepted in all cases ?. Ans. No, especially if the bloodstain had become dull....

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-IV]

Q.16 The “disclosure statement” of the accused admitted in evidence contains inculpatory portions also. Is it permissible for the Court to separate and exclude the inculpatory portion from the admissible portion of the statement ? Ans. Yes. (Vide Para 16 of Pulukuri Kotayya AIR 1947 PC 67; paras 14 and 15 of Mohmed Inayatullah v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1976 SC 483 = (1976)...

“Recovery Evidence” Under Section 27 Of The Evidence Act- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-III]

Q.6 Since the words used in Section 27 are “a person accused of an offence” should there not be a formal accusation against the person in the form of registering an FIR against him?. Ans. No. The words “person accused of an offence” occurring in Section 27 of the Evidence Act are only descriptive of his status and it is enough that after the disclosure statement is recorded,...