Objection to S.

27 Evidence Act

1. Only the information which relates distinctly to the discovery of the fact is admissible
o Tan Hung Song v Rex (1951) MLJ 181

 The section is not intended to let in a confession generally and not one word more of the
information which the accused supplied should be given in evidence than is strictly necessary
to show now the fact which was discovered is connected with the accused so as in itself to be
a relevant fact against him.
o Pulukkuri Kottaya v Emperor AIR 1947 PC
 “I stabbed with a spear. I hid the spear in a yard in my village. I will show you
the place”

 The condition necessary to bring the section into operation is that discovery
of fact in consequence of information received from a person accused of any
offence in the custody of a police officer must be deposed to, and thereupon
so much of the information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered
may be proved.
 The section is brought into operation when a person in police custody
produces from some place of concealment some object, such as a dead body,
a weapon, or ornaments, said to be connected with the crime of which the
information is accused.
 ‘Fact discovered’ is the physical object produced, and that any information
which relates distinctly to that object can be proved.
 The weapon produced is the one used by him in the commission of a
murder…would be admissible.
 Information supplied by a person in custody that ‘I will produce a knife
concealed in the roof of my house’…It leads to the discovery of the fact that a
knife is proved to have been used in commission of the offence, the fact
discovered is very relevant.
 The objects produced…would be irrelevant unless they were shown to be
connected with the murder, and there was no evidence so to connect them
apart from the confession.

 Privy Council held that the whole of the statement was admissible except for
the first part.
o Refer page 286 Augustive Paul

 The law requires that the information must be precise or disclose the exact place where the
object was kept concealed by him then even if the object is recovered, it cannot be said that
it was recovered pursuant to the information furnished by the accused
o Page 272 Augustive Paul
o Paramasivan v State 1990 Cr LJ 1491
o State v Ram Ch AIR 1965 Or 175
o Ovisa v Nursingha 1990 Cr LJ 1676
 The act pointing out an object to the police without evidence of the information that led to
the discovery has little value.
o PP v Khoo Boo Hock & anor (1990) 1 CLJ 971
o Page 273 Augustive Paul

2. If the evidence of the information given by the police officer goes beyond the purview of this
section then that portion must be ignored by the court.
o Page 291 augustive Paul
o PP v Norzilan bin Yaacob & Anor (1989) 1 MLJ 442, 445

3. Refer page 294 Augustive Paul

o Tan Huy song v R (1951) MLJ 181