Legal provisions involved: Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act; Sections 302 and 376D read with Section 34 IPC.

Judgement by: Supreme Court of India

Bench: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice K. Vinod Chandran.

Facts

A woman was raped and murdered, and her body was later found near a road. The trial court convicted the accused, and the High Court upheld the conviction. One accused approached the Supreme Court. The prosecution relied on items like a phone, knife, cash, and clothes, saying they were recovered under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. However, these items were already with the accused when he was arrested.

Key legal provisions

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act; Sections 302 and 376D read with Section 34 IPC.

Issues raised

Can articles found on the accused at the time of arrest be shown as recoveries under Section 27?

Arguments of the case

The accused said the items were not hidden and could have been taken during a normal search. The prosecution claimed they were recovered based on disclosure.

Judgement

The Supreme Court said that items found on the body of the accused at the time of arrest cannot be treated as Section 27 recoveries. Such recoveries must involve hidden items found after a disclosure. Although the court rejected these recoveries and removed charges it still upheld the conviction for rape and murder based on other strong evidence.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.