REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Soj Appellant

V/S

STATE Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Is authorship of concealment sine qua non to make information received from a person accused of any offence in the custody of a Police Officer admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act (for short, "the Act")? Will such information which is otherwise admissible become inadmissible solely for the reason that such information does not reveal authorship of concealment -

(2.) BOTH sides relied on various decisions on the point. The Division Bench though, was of the opinion that authorship of concealment is not sine qua non for admissibility of evidence under Section 27 of the Act found apparent conflict between decisions of this Court on the question and felt that the question has to be decided by a larger bench. Accordingly the Division Bench by order dated March 30, 2010 has referred the question for a decision.

(3.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor on the other hand argued that authorship of concealment is not an absolute necessity to bring the information given by the accused within the scope of Section 27 of the Act. He cited the decisions in State of Maharashtra v. Suresh 2000 KHC 904 : : 2000 (1) SCC 471 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 263, State of Karnataka v. David Rozario 2002 KHC 1878 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 1852 : 2002 (7) SCC 728: AIR 2002 SC 3272 : : 2002 CriLJ 4127, Amitsingh Bhikamsingh Thakur v. State of Maharashtra 2007 (1) KHC 487 : : 2007 (2) SCC 310 : JT 2007 (1) SC 390 : AIR 2007 SC 676 : 2007 CriLJ 1168 and V. Venugopal v. State of Kerala,, 2007 (2) KHC 649 :, 2007 (2) KLD 112.

Click here to view full judgment.

SOJ Vs. STATE

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address