Soj, S/O.Kamalolbhavan v. State of Kerala
Case brief
What is this about?
A constitutional bench definitively resolves conflicting views by holding that information received from an accused in police custody leading to the discovery of facts is admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, even if it does not reveal the authorship of concealment.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 CRL.A.No. 1204 of 2006()
------------------------
(SC.580/2004 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM)
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.2
---------------------------------------------
SOJ, S/O. KAMALOLBHAVAN, VILAYIL VEEDU, EDAVANAKONAM, VEILAILOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI
SRI.GEORGE PHILIP
SRI.R.ANIL SRI.RAJU RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RI.DELVIN JACOB MATHEWS
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether authorship of concealment is a sine qua non for the admissibility of information received from an accused in police custody under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
Whether information leading to the discovery of facts without disclosure of authorship of concealment is admissible.
The correct interpretation of the expression 'fact discovered' under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
State
- respondent
Prakash Kumar
Coram
Rajendra Sahay
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court