Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13). The learned Counsel for the Appellant would emphasise on the fact that the victim (PW 16) had not named the Appellant to the Doctor at both the STNM hospital as well as the Central Referral Hospital, Tadong and would thus argue that the identification of the Appellant in Court could not be considered. The learned Counsel for the Appellant would draw the attention of the Court to the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C to question no. 82 wherein the Appellant had stated that on the relevant night he was going to his Aunt‟s house for dinner on her invitation when he heard people shouting „chor chor‟ and saw a man running away and thus he too started chasing the said man because of which he had fallen down into the „jhora‟ and that the actual assailant had jumped across the „jhora‟ and run away and argue that, therefore, it was a case of mistaken identity and that the Appellant had provided Kaziman Gurung Vs. State of Sikkim adequate explanation. The learned Counsel for the Appellant would also question the alleged recovery and seizure of material objects. It was also argued that the prosecution could not stand in the leg of the defence and it would have to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and that the chain of circumstances has not been established to sustain a conviction. The learned Counsel for the Appellant would also argue that human blood could not be detected in the „rambo knife‟ (MO II) and thus it could not be connected to the crime. The learned Counsel for the Appellant would also argue that Test Identification Parade having not been conducted the identification of the Appellant in Court would have no value. He would also argue that there was personal enmity between the Appellant and the victim (PW 16) as the Appellant owed Rs. 70,000/- to the victim (PW 16) which fact was available in the statement recorded of the Appellant to question no. 75 and 81 of the Section 313 of the Cr.P.C statement.

10). Learned APP would also argue that Test Identification Parade was not required as the victim (PW 16) himself was a witness and that the plea of alibi taken by the Appellant is proved to be false. Learned APP would rely upon the Dudh Nath Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh2, Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar 3 and Jumni and Others v. State of Haryana4. The learned APP should also argue that the ingredient of Section 392 IPC i.e. robbery had been fully satisfied. Learned APP would thus argue that the impugned Judgment and sentence needs no interference. Consideration:-

65. The Apex Court in Mukesh & Another v. State for NCT of Delhi & Ors. decided by a three Judges Bench held that Test Identification Proceedings corroborate and lend assurance to the dock Identification of accused and that TIP does not constitute substantive evidence. The Apex Court referred to its previous Judgments which held, inter-alia, that an identification test is primarily meant for the purpose of helping the investigation agency with an assurance that the progress with the investigation of an offence is proceeding on the right line; Identification can only be used as corroborative of the statement in Court; Identification parades belong to the stage of investigation, and there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure which obliges the investigating Agencies to hold, or confers a right upon the accused to claim a test identification parade. They do not constitute substantive evidence and these parades are essentially governed by Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Failure to hold a test identification parade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in Court. The weight to be attached to such identification should be for the Courts of fact; substantive evidence is the evidence of identification in Court and the test identification parade provides corroboration to the identification of witness in Court, if required; identification of accused either in test identification parade or in Court is not a sine quo non in every case if from the circumstances the guilt is otherwise established. Many a times, crimes are committed under the cover of darkness when ( 2017) 6 SCC 1 Kaziman Gurung Vs. State of Sikkim none is able to identify the accused. The commission of a crime can be proved also by circumstantial evidence; and the proposition of law is quite clear that even if there is no previous TIP, the Court may appreciate the dock identification as being above board and more than conclusive.

66. The law with regard to the importance of Test Identification Parade and identification in Court is well settled. Failure to hold Test Identification Parade does not make the evidence of identification in Court inadmissible. Identification in Court is a substantive piece of evidence. Test Identification Parade, if conducted, would corroborate the same. Failure to do so does not make the evidence of identification in Court inadmissible.

67. In the present case it was the victim who identified the Appellant in Court. The Appellant who had been seen by the victim (PW 16) from close quarters categorically identified the Appellant as the assailant. His evidence is truthful and clear and needs no corroboration. The eye witness account of the victim (PW 16) who was injured with a deep cut injury on the neck could have easily seen the face of the Appellant assaulting him and his appearance and identity would well remain imprinted in his mind. As a result of the Appellant trying to escape after the assault he fell into a nearby „jhora‟ from where he was picked up by the Police, Tashi Wangchuk Rana (PW 9), a police personnel on patrolling duty and Jigme Bhutia (PW 10), a home guard also on patrolling duty and taken to the hospital. The evidence of Tashi Wangchuk Rana (PW 9) and Jigme Bhutia (PW 10) who also categorically identified the Appellant in Court further corroborates the evidence of the victim (PW 16).