u/s 27 of evidence act

Section 27 lays down 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 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.

Yes, please post queries, not riddles.

As per the concerned query!

Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 makes a confessional statement relevant even if it is made to a police officer in police custody, but the condition is that the confession made has led to the discovery of some facts. The essential ingredients of section 27 are:

1. That a fact is discovered, which is relevant, in consequence of the information received from a person accused of an offence.

2. Fact discovered must be deposed to.

3. Such information which leads to the discovery of fact must be given by the accused person in police custody.

4. Only so much of the information as relates distinctly and clearly to the facts thereby discovered is may be proved.

If the statement of an accused person made to the police officer satisfies all requirements hereinbefore mentioned his statement may be used against him, but only so much of statement which relates distinctly and clearly to the facts thereby recovered.

In the matter of State Govt. of NCT of Delhi V/s Sunil & Anr, (2001)
The
It was held that non-attestation of seizure memos by independent witnesses cannot be a ground to disbelieve recovery of articles’ list consequent upon the statement of the accused. It was further held that there is no requirement, either under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to obtain signatures of independent witnesses. If the version of the police is not shown to be unreliable, there is no reason to doubt the version of the police regarding the arrest and contents of the seizure memos.

Hope it clarifies the issues!
Regards
Minakshi Bindhani