Supreme Court Clarifies Admissibility of Accused’s Statements Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act

Supreme Court Clarifies Admissibility of Accused’s Statements Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has clarified the conditions under which statements made by an accused can be admitted as evidence in court. The ruling pertains to Section 27 of the Evidence Act, which governs the admissibility of such statements.

Section 27 of the Evidence Act

Section 27 of the Evidence Act stipulates that statements made by an accused are admissible in court only if they lead to the discovery of new evidence. This section is intended to ensure that confessions or statements are directly linked to tangible proof.

Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court’s ruling underscores that statements by an accused must result in the revelation of new facts or evidence to be considered valid. The mere existence of a statement, without subsequent evidence, is insufficient for its admissibility.

Implications of the Judgment

This decision emphasizes the importance of concrete evidence linking an accused’s statement to the crime. It aims to safeguard the legal process from the misuse of confessions or statements without substantial corroborative evidence, reinforcing justice and due process.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs):

  1. What does Section 27 of the Evidence Act address?
    • A) The admissibility of all statements made by an accused.
    • B) The admissibility of statements made by an accused only if they lead to the discovery of new evidence.
    • C) The admissibility of witness statements.
    • D) The admissibility of statements made during a trial.
    Answer: B) The admissibility of statements made by an accused only if they lead to the discovery of new evidence.
  2. What did the Supreme Court’s recent ruling emphasize regarding statements by an accused?
    • A) Statements are admissible regardless of new evidence.
    • B) Statements must lead to the discovery of new evidence to be admissible.
    • C) Statements must be corroborated by witness testimonies.
    • D) Statements are admissible only if they are made under oath.
    Answer: B) Statements must lead to the discovery of new evidence to be admissible.
  3. What is the primary aim of the Supreme Court’s judgment on the admissibility of statements?
    • A) To expedite the legal process.
    • B) To prevent the misuse of confessions without substantial evidence.
    • C) To allow more confessions to be admitted in court.
    • D) To increase the number of convictions.
    Answer: B) To prevent the misuse of confessions without substantial evidence.