Ratio on Section 27 of the Evidence Act:

Section 27 carves out an exception to Sections 25 and 26 by permitting proof of so much of the information received from an accused in police custody as relates distinctly to a fact thereby discovered, whether it amounts to a confession or not. (!) (!)

The "fact discovered" is not equivalent to the physical object produced but embraces the place of concealment and the accused's knowledge thereof; the information must distinctly relate to this fact. Information regarding past use, history, or connection of the object to the crime (e.g., "with which I stabbed A") is inadmissible as it does not pertain to the discovery. (!) (!) (!) (!)

"Fact" includes both physical/material objects (perceptible by senses) and mental facts (knowledge or awareness of the accused), but the discovery must combine the physical element (object and its location) with the accused's mental awareness thereof. Purely mental facts dissociated from physical recovery are not covered. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

Only the portion of information that is the direct, immediate, and proximate cause of the discovery is admissible; the rest (indirectly or remotely related) is excluded. "Distinctly relates" means "directly," "indubitably," "strictly," or "unmistakably." (!) (!) (!)

Pointing out the object by the accused is not essential; the police may verify the information by going to the spot with witnesses and recovering the object, amounting to discovery if the information was the proximate cause. Failure to take the accused to the spot affects credibility but not admissibility. (!)

Joint/simultaneous disclosures by multiple accused are not per se inadmissible but are difficult to rely on due to challenges in attributing specific words to each; credibility and nexus to discovery must be scrutinized. (!) (!)

In the facts, no facts were discovered distinctly at Gilani's instance (e.g., no articles recovered or hideouts pinpointed solely from his information); supervening information from others led to discoveries, rendering his disclosure inadmissible. (!) (!)