“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...

“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,...

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

Q.11 Whether a statement by the accused that the weapon discovered was (“the weapon with which he committed murder”), will fall under Section 27 which contains the words “whether it amounts to a confession or not” ?. Ans. No. The bracketed portion of the statement is not admissible in evidence. In para 10 of Pulukuri Kottaya v. Emperor AIR 1947 PC 67 – Sir John Beaumont,...

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

I N T R O D U C T I O N Any discussion on Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 will be incomplete without reference to Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act. Section 25 prohibits proof of “confession” made directly to a “police officer” by an accused person. Section 26 interdicts proof of a “confession” made by an accused person while he is in the custody of...

“Law Of Wills”- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-XVI]

COURT HAVING JURISDICTION TO GRANT SUCCESSION CERTIFICATEQ. 77 Which is the Court having jurisdiction to grant a Succession Certificate? Ans. The Court having jurisdiction to grant a Succession Certificate is the District Judge within whose territorial limits the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death. (Vide Section 371 of the Indian Succession Act). If at that time...

“Law Of Wills”- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-XV]

ALTERATION OR REVOCATION OF PROBATE OR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATIONQ.71 Can errors in a Probate or Letters of Administration be rectified ? Ans. Yes. Chapter 3 of PART IX of the Indian Succession Act deals with the alterations and revocations of a Probate or Letters of Administration. As per Section 261, errors in the names, descriptions or in setting forth the time...

“Law Of Wills”- Questions & Answers By Justice V Ramkumar [Part-XIV]

Q.66 Is not the applicant exempted from executing a bond in a case where the proceedings are non-contentious ?Ans. No. Exemption from executing the bond on the ground that the proceedings were non-contentious, is not contemplated by Rule 18 of the Succession Rules, 1968 (Kerala). (Vide In Re Mariamma Thomas (2006) 2 KLT 11 = 2006 KHC 529 – K.M. Joseph - J).Q.67 What is the...