S. 27 Evidence Act | Recovery Based On Statement By Accused Before Recording Of S.27 Disclosure Not Admissible : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that an alleged recovery of incriminating materials based on a statement given by the accused en route the police station before the recording of the statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act at the police station is not admissible.The Court set aside the conviction of an accused in a murder case after noting that the discovery of the incriminating. The Supreme Court held that an alleged recovery of incriminating materials based on a statement given by the accused en route the police station before the recording of the statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act at the police station is not admissible. The Court set aside the conviction of an accused in a murder case after noting that the discovery of the incriminating circumstances against the accused was not based on the disclosure statements made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872, but based on the statement recorded by the police when he was en route to the police station. The Court cautioned against making a simple case of chance recovery as a disclosure under Section 27, as the provision would be prone to misuse providing “a chance to the prosecution to make out a statement of the accused with a simple case of recovery as a case of discovery of fact to attract the provisions of Section 27 of the Evidence Act.” The bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra heard the criminal appeal filed by the accused challenging his conviction on the ground that the discovery of the incriminating evidence against him was done before the recording of his disclosure statements under Section 27 of the Act.