In which of the following case it was held that lsquo section 27 of the Evidence Act starts wit...........

Indian Evidence Act (IEA) 1872 Relevancy of Facts

In which of the following case, it was held that ‘section 27 of the Evidence Act starts with the word ‘provided’. Therefore, it is a proviso by way of an exception to section 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act. If the facts deposed under Section 27 of the Act, are not voluntarily, then it will not be admissible, and will be hit by Art 20(3) of the Constitution of India’.

State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1955 SC 1298

State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1961 SC 1808

State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1954 SC 4764

State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad (1946) Privy Council

Explanation:

- Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act is an exception to sections 25 & 26, which generally bar confessions made to police.

- The phrase "provided" makes Section 27 a proviso, allowing certain facts discovered via police statements to be admissible, but only if made voluntarily.

- If these statements are not voluntary, they fall under Article 20(3) protection (right against self-incrimination) and are inadmissible.

- The Supreme Court in State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1961 SC 1808 clarified this legal position in detail.

- Other options (1955, 1954, "Privy Council 1946") are not the relevant case for this principle.

Option 2: State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1961 SC 1808 is the correct answer.

By: santosh

Profile ResourcesReport error

Submit Error

Let's Discuss

Post Comment

Explore
Micro
Courses

Free
Video
Courses

Free
Test
Series

Free
PDF
Documents

Back to Main Page

In which of the following case it was held that lsquo section 27 of the Evidence Act starts wit...........

Explanation:

Let's Discuss

Search below