Choose the correct statements:-

(i) The recovery pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the accused under section 27 of the Evidence Act is admissible in evidence. The court must regard the inadmissible part of the statement and take note only that part of his evidence, which  distinctly relates to the discovery of the articles pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the  accused.

(ii) The discovery of fact includes the discovery of an object found, the place from which it is produced and the knowledge of the accused as to his existence.

(iii) The recovery made under section 27 of the Evidence Act, not only acts as foundation stone for proceeding with investigation, but also completes chain of circumstances.

(iv) Where recovery and seizure of articles was made in pursuance of statement of accused, mere absence of attestation by the independent witness is a ground to discard the seizure evidence under section 27 of the Evidence Act.

(v) The fact of which evidence is given sought to be given must be relevant to the issue. It must be borne in mind that the provision has nothing to do with question of relevancy.

The relevancy of the fact discovered must be established according to the prescriptions relating to relevancy of other evidence connecting it with crime in order to make the fact discovered admissible.

(vi) The fact must have been discovered. The discovery must have been in consequence of some information received from the accused and not by the accused’s own act.

(vii) The person giving information must be accused of any offence and no need to be in police custody.

(viii) The discovery of fact in consequence of information received from an accused in custody must be deposed to. Thereupon, only that portion of the information which relates distinctly or strictly to the fact discovered can be proved. The rest is inadmissible.

(ix) For the applicability of section 27 of the Evidence Act, two conditions are prerequisite (i) the information must be such as caused discovery of the fact. (ii) The information must relate distinctly to the fact discovered so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or relate distinctly thereby discovery may be proved. It is assumed that there should be a statement first and it would be followed by the discovery and if there was first discovery followed by the statement, such statement would inadmissible. It is also settled proposition of law that the statement of the accused must be volunteered and should not be given by threat with any pointed question.

(x) ‘Custody’ is not equivalent to arrest. The word ‘custody’ in selection 27 of the Evidence Act does not necessarily mean detention or confinement.

(xi) With regard to section 27 of the Evidence Act, what is important is discovery of the material object at the disclosure of the accused but such disclosure alone would not 

automatically lead to the conclusion that the offence was also committed by the accused.

(xii) The discovery evidence, by itself, is subsidiary and cannot sustain a conviction but where there is plenty of other evidence to sustain the prosecution case, the discovery 

evidence could be treated as a valuable piece of corroborative evidence.

(xiii) Under section 27 of the Evidence Act, only so much of the information as distinctly relates to the facts really thereby discovered in admissible. The word ‘fact’ means some concrete or material facts to which the information directly relates.

(xiv) It cannot be said that section 27 of the Act, would be operable only after formal arrest under section 46(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the expression ‘accused of any

offence’ used in section 27 of the Evidence Act, are descriptive of person making statement.