The information as to past user, or the past history, of the object produced is not related to its discovery

Boby vs State of Kerala | Section 27 Evidence Act | Last Seen Theory | Circumstantial Evidence | Murder Accused Acquitted | CrA 1439 OF 2009 | 12 Jan 2023 | Justices B R Gavai and M M Sundresh | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 50 | Section 27 of the Evidence Act requires that the fact discovered embraces the place from which the object is produced and the knowledge of the accused as to this, and the information given must relate distinctly to the said fact. The information as to past user, or the past history, of the object produced is not related to its discovery | Two essential requirements for the application of Section 27 of the Evidence Act are that (1) the person giving information must be an accused of any offence and (2) he must also be in police custody. The Court held that the provisions of Section 27 of the Evidence Act are based on the view that if a fact is actually discovered in consequence of information given, some guarantee is afforded thereby that the information was true and consequently the said information can safely be allowed to be given in evidence | The law expects the IO to draw the discovery panchnama as contemplated under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.