IPC Section 27

IPC Section 27 is a crucial provision that deals with the admissibility of evidence obtained from information given by an accused person during police interrogation. It specifically allows facts discovered as a result of such information to be used in court, even if the accused’s statement itself is not admissible as evidence. This section plays a vital role in criminal investigations by enabling law enforcement to act on leads provided by the accused.

Understanding IPC Section 27 is important because it balances the rights of the accused with the need for effective crime detection. It ensures that while confessions may be protected under law, the tangible evidence uncovered through those confessions can still be used to establish guilt or innocence.

IPC Section 27 – Exact Provision

In simple terms, this means that if the police discover a fact based on information given by an accused person, that fact can be presented as evidence in court. However, the actual statement or confession made by the accused is not directly admissible. Only the facts found because of that information are allowed.

• Allows evidence of facts discovered from accused’s information.

• Does not permit direct use of the accused’s statement as evidence.

• Applies only when the accused is in police custody.

• Ensures tangible evidence can be used in trial.

• Supports effective crime investigation while protecting accused’s rights.

Purpose of IPC Section 27

The primary legal objective of IPC Section 27 is to enable courts to admit evidence of facts discovered due to information provided by an accused person, without admitting the accused’s actual confession. This provision helps maintain the balance between protecting the accused from self-incrimination and allowing the prosecution to use discovered evidence. It encourages police to investigate leads while ensuring that confessions are not misused as direct evidence.

• Protects accused’s right against self-incrimination.

• Allows use of discovered tangible evidence in trial.

• Facilitates effective law enforcement investigations.

Cognizance under IPC Section 27

Cognizance refers to the court’s recognition and acceptance of facts discovered under IPC Section 27. Courts take cognizance when facts have been discovered following information from the accused in custody. The section ensures that such facts can be legally considered during trial.

• Cognizance is taken when facts are distinctly related to the accused’s information.

• Only facts discovered, not the statement itself, are considered.

• Applicable when the accused is in lawful police custody.

Bail under IPC Section 27

IPC Section 27 itself does not define any offence or prescribe punishment; rather, it relates to evidence admissibility. Therefore, the question of bail depends on the substantive offence involved in the case. Since Section 27 is procedural, it does not affect whether the accused is granted bail or not.

• Bail depends on the offence charged, not Section 27.

• Section 27 evidence may influence bail decisions indirectly.

• Does not create a separate offence or bail category.

Triable By (Which Court Has Jurisdiction?)

Since IPC Section 27 deals with evidence admissibility and not a substantive offence, it does not specify any court jurisdiction. The trial court jurisdiction depends on the offence under investigation. Generally, offences linked to Section 27 evidence are tried by Magistrate or Sessions Courts depending on severity.

• Trial court depends on the substantive offence.

• Magistrate courts try less serious offences.

• Sessions courts try serious offences involving Section 27 evidence.

Example of IPC Section 27 in Use

Suppose a person is arrested on suspicion of theft. During police custody, the accused reveals the location of stolen goods. The police recover the stolen items from that location. While the accused’s statement about the location cannot be used as direct evidence, the recovered stolen goods can be presented in court as evidence under IPC Section 27. This helps the prosecution establish the connection between the accused and the crime without relying on the confession itself.

In contrast, if the accused’s statement is used directly without discovery of any fact, it would be inadmissible. Thus, Section 27 allows only the discovered facts to be admitted, not the confession.

Historical Relevance of IPC Section 27

IPC Section 27 has its roots in English common law principles that sought to protect accused persons from self-incrimination while allowing discovery of evidence. Over time, Indian courts have interpreted this section to clarify its scope and application.

• Introduced with the Indian Penal Code in 1860.

• Landmark case:

  Emperor v. Raghubir Singh (1912)

  clarified admissibility scope.

• Judicial interpretations have refined its application over decades.

Modern Relevance of IPC Section 27

In 2025, IPC Section 27 remains highly relevant in criminal jurisprudence. Courts continue to uphold its principle to ensure fair trials. Modern interpretations emphasize strict adherence to the condition that only facts distinctly related to the accused’s information are admissible. This safeguards against misuse of confessions and protects fundamental rights.

• Supports evidence-based prosecutions in contemporary cases.

• Courts scrutinize the connection between information and discovered facts carefully.

• Helps balance investigation needs with accused’s rights in digital and physical evidence contexts.

Related Sections to IPC Section 27

• Section 24 – Confession caused by inducement, threat, or promise

• Section 25 – Confession to police officer not to be proved

• Section 26 – Confession by accused while in custody

• Section 28 – Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement

• Section 29 – Confession otherwise relevant

• Section 30 – Consideration of previous statements of accused

Case References under IPC Section 27

1. Emperor v. Raghubir Singh (1912, ILR 39 Cal 390)

   – Established that only facts discovered as a consequence of information given by accused are admissible, not the confession itself.

2. State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh (1999 AIR 2378, SC)

   – Supreme Court held that Section 27 applies only when accused is in lawful custody and information leads to discovery of fact.

3. Ram Narain v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1957 AIR 710, SC)

   – Clarified that the fact discovered must be distinctly related to the information given by the accused.

Key Facts Summary for IPC Section 27

• Section:

  27

• Title:

  Admissibility of Discovered Facts

• Offence Type:

  Procedural – Evidence admissibility

• Punishment:

  Not applicable

• Triable By:

  Depends on substantive offence

Conclusion on IPC Section 27

IPC Section 27 plays a pivotal role in the Indian criminal justice system by allowing courts to admit evidence of facts discovered through information provided by an accused person in custody. This provision ensures that while confessions themselves are protected to prevent self-incrimination, the tangible evidence uncovered as a result can be used to establish the truth. It thus strikes a crucial balance between the rights of the accused and the interests of justice.

Its application continues to be relevant in modern law, supporting fair trials and effective investigations. Understanding Section 27 helps legal professionals and citizens appreciate how evidence is handled and how the law safeguards individual rights while enabling crime detection.

FAQs on IPC Section 27

What kind of information does IPC Section 27 cover?

It covers information given by an accused person in police custody that leads to discovery of facts. Only the discovered facts, not the statement itself, are admissible as evidence.

Can the accused’s confession be used directly as evidence under Section 27?

No. Section 27 allows only the facts discovered from the information to be proved, not the confession or statement itself.

Does Section 27 apply if the accused is not in police custody?

No. The provision applies only when the accused is in lawful police custody during interrogation.

Is Section 27 related to bail or punishment?

No. Section 27 deals with evidence admissibility and does not prescribe any punishment or affect bail directly.

Which courts consider evidence under IPC Section 27?

Courts trying the substantive offence consider such evidence. This can be Magistrate or Sessions Courts depending on the offence’s severity.