sufficient
for dock identification. Further, be it noted that non-conduct of test
identification parade will not vitiate dock identification in all cases (See
Mahabir ... before the conduct of test identification parade, then, the test
identification parade becomes sham and as a sequel, the dock identification
becomes suspect. However
done by a Magistrate, as a corroborative piece of evidence for dock identification
In a given case, if the Police do not want corroborative evidence ... identity, that cannot be used as a corroborative evidence for dock identification in view of the bar under Section 162 , Cr.P.C. In other
done by a Magistrate, as a corroborative piece of evidence for dock identification.
In a given case, if the police do not want corroborative evidence ... test identification parade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in court. The weight to be attached to such identification should be a matter
never
known the accused earlier. It is well settled that dock
identification without a prior TIP has little
evidentiary value where the witness ... part of the investigative process and that the
substantive evidence is dock identification; however,
where the accused is a stranger to the witness
never
known the accused earlier. It is well settled that dock
identification without a prior TIP has little
evidentiary value where the witness ... part of the investigative process and that the
substantive evidence is dock identification; however,
where the accused is a stranger to the witness
statement cannot be
used as a corroborative piece of evidence for dock
identification. In a case where the victim did not have
acquaintance with ... before the conduct of test
identification parade, then, the test identification parade
becomes sham and as a sequel, the dock identification
becomes suspect. However
piece of
evidence, or what can be called evidence is only dock
identification that is identification made by witness in Court
during trial. This identification ... trial court should be very cautious while accepting the dock
identification by such a witness (See: Kunjumon v. State of
Kerala
inspire confidence about the identity of the assailants and ex
consequenti, dock identification for the first time in the Court after nine years ... trial court should be very cautious while accepting the dock identification by
such a witness (see : Kunjumon v. State of Kerala
Since no test identification parade was conducted by the police,
the dock identification deserves to be brushed aside.
This Court's finding:
As rightly ... noted that non-conduct
of Test Identification Parade will not vitiate dock identification in all cases
(See Mahabir vs. State of Delhi3
test identification parade would not make
inadmissible the evidence of identification in court. The weight to be attached to
such identification should be a matter ... have been used as a
corroborative piece of evidence qua dock identification. It is a trite law that
identification parade proceedings conducted by the Magistrate
