I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Whether a statement, which is popularly known as 'disclosure statement', must be reduced into writing in order to make such a statement admissible in evidence, under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, is the question, which this reference has to answer.

2. The material facts, which have led to this reference, may, in brief, be set out as under:

(i) In Pandav Koya v. State of Assam reported in 2006 (1) GLT 267, a Division Bench of this Court took the view that Section27 of the Evidence Act would not be applicable if the accused person's statement, which is alleged to have led to the discovery of a fact, has not been reduced into writing.

(ii) In Anup Nath and Ors. v. State of Assam reported in 2008 (1) GLT 255 : 2008 Cri LJ (NOC) 605, another Division Bench, however, took the view that Section 27 of the Act will not cease to be applicable merely because of the fact that the disclosure statement, made by the accused, has not been reduced into writing.

(iii) Yet another Division Bench, in Alphus Munda and Ors. v. State of Assam reported in 1996 (3) GLT 568, had held that Section 27 does not make it mandatory that the information, given by an accused to the police, b