Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5 As against this, the learned APP contended that memorandum statement of co-accused Tanhya Kale shows involvement of appellant / accused no.1 Ramesh Bhosale in the crime in question. He further argued that in the TIP conducted by 1 1949 DGLaw (All) 245 203-APPEALS-386-2012-975-2015.doc PW6 Rushikesh Shelke, the appellant / accused no.1 Ramesh Bhosale is identified by PW1 Vandana Ugale and her husband PW2 Daulat Ugale. The learned APP placed reliance on the judgment of the Madras High Court in the matter of S.H.O. vs. Subramani @ Jeeva @ Kullajeeva 2 as well as judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Maharashtra vs. Sukhdev Singh3 to submit that dock identification is a substantive evidence and evidence of TIP is a corroborative evidence, which is admissible in law. With the aid of these two judgments, the learned APP submitted that identity of appellant / accused no.1 Ramesh Bhosale as one of the culprits is duly proved by the prosecution, and as such, he is rightly convicted. The learned APP further supported the impugned judgment and order of conviction of appellant / accused no.3 Anand Raimokar.