LI Network
Published on: January 6, 2024 at 16:05 IST
The recent verdict by the Supreme Court highlighted concerns about Section 27 of the Evidence Act, cautioning that its frequent use by the police warrants careful scrutiny from the Courts to ensure the credibility of evidence, noting its susceptibility to misuse.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti made these remarks during a criminal appeal. However, the Court clarified that not every instance of invoking Section 27 should be distrusted automatically and disregarded, stressing the need for a case-by-case evaluation.
The case involved an appeal by Perumal, convicted for the murder of Rajini @ Rajinikanth. During detention in another murder case, Perumal made a disclosure statement about Rajinikanth’s murder, leading the police to recover the deceased’s remains and subsequently arrest Perumal.
The Trial Court convicted him under Section 302 of the IPC, a decision upheld by the High Court, prompting the appeal to the Apex Court.
Justice Khanna’s judgment shed light on the interpretation of ‘custody’ under Section 27, expanding it to include any form of police restriction or surveillance, not limited to formal custody.
The Court noted that denial without explanation in the accused’s statement under Section 313 of the CrPC allows drawing adverse inferences, adding to the chain of circumstances, strengthening the prosecution’s case.
Consequently, the Court upheld Perumal’s conviction, emphasizing that the judgment of acquittal lacked substantive evidentiary value to exonerate him.
