DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT

TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE AND ITS

RELEVANCY

FACULTY: DR. NANDINI C.P

BY-

SAKETH ROY VYDYULA

JOSHMA
DEEPTHI P.
RISHAB
ADITHYA P.V.
SEMESTER IV
 LETERATURE REVIEW

ARTICLE REVIEW : by Rishab Sharma

This literature review is based on the case note of when the identification parade is
mandatory R V. Forbes . In Forbes the victim had been approached by the
defendant shortly after withdrawing money from a cashpoint machine. The defendant,
on being refused his request for money, pursued his victim and, standing very close to
him, threatened to 'cut him up'. The victim escaped to his friend's car and drove away,
but later saw the defendant again in the street as they drove past. On this occasion the
victim made eye contact with the defendant who spat towards the car as it went by.
The victim called the police on a mobile phone and gave a description of his assailant.
The police arrived a few minutes later and drove the victim around the streets in a
police car until he identified the defendant who was then arrested. The defendant
denied the victim's allegations and on three occasions before the trial asked for an
identification parade, but none was held1.

The trial judge considered herself bound by the decision of the Court of Appeal four
months earlier in Popat. In that case the court had ruled that where a witness had
already made an actual and complete identification of a suspect pursuant did not
impose a mandatory obligation to hold an identification parade merely because a
suspect requested one. Accordingly, the trial judge did not consider it necessary to
determine whether the failure to hold an identification parade should result in the
exclusion of the identification evidence pursuant to s. 78. Although the Court of
Appeal refused the defendant leave to appeal to the House of Lords, it certified that its
decision involved a point of law of general public importance. This was prescient,
since in the light of the judgment in Forbes, Popat had been referred back to the Court
of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Notwithstanding Law LJ's
detailed criticism of the reasoning in Popat, the Court of Appeal in Popat preferred
the purposive approach of Hob house LJ and, accordingly, affirmed its earlier
decision2.

Whilst the Committee was clear that the obligation to hold a parade was mandatory, it
was equally clear that a breach would not automatically lead to exclusion of the other
identification evidence. The Committee did, however, endorse the view expressed by
Laws LJ that the failure to hold a parade might result in exclusion where the other
identification evidence was in some way tainted: for example, where the suspect was
already in the hands of the police at the moment he was identified. But, as Professor
Birch notes in her commentary to Popat, 4 a key problem with informal identifications

1
Sir john woodroffe & syed Amir ali law of evidence ( lexis nexis , new delhi 2009
 is the difficulty of establishing whether or not there has been contamination3. Such
identifications are not constrained by any conditions designed to put the witness to the
test. For example, in a case such as Popat there is no means of knowing the volume of
pedestrian traffic at the time the defendant was identified, nor the quality of the light,
nor the number of people passing by belonging to the defendant's age and racial
group, and physical type. Even if answers to these questions were forthcoming there
is no means of testing them. The answers by the witness or the police officer have to
be taken on trust. Nor is there any way of knowing whether the police officer has
suggested to the witness that the suspect is the right man. In addition to the risk of
contamination, there is always the potential prejudice to the defendant caused by the
loss of the possibility that the witness might fail to pick him out on identification
parade.

ARTICLE REVIEW: By Aditya P.V

APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE IN SESSIONS CASES 4

In this article the author first talks about the reliance to be based on TIP , and covers
topics like Identification of more than one accused in the same TIP , when accused is
unknown to the witness or what is the effect of belated identification is it admissible or not.
The author also talk about circumstances where witness already seen the accused, and why
test identification parade is not a decisive factor which plays a role in conviction.

TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE IN THE LIGHT OF SUPREME COURT

DECISION IN MULLAS CASE5

In this article the author first there is no provision either in Criminal Procedure
Code or the Indian Evidence Act for holding test identification parades. They are
merely tests to determine the memory of the witnesses based on the first impression of
the accused involved in the crime, to truly testify that the accused was the one who is
actually involved in the commission of the offence, to which the witness figures as an
eye-witness. Later he stated that for test identification parade time is the factor which
influences the credibility of it most. In Lalaji Singh's case," it was held that there is no
hard and fast rule for holding the test identification parade, though it is desirable to
hold the same as early as possible. If the delay is inordinate and the possibility of tile
accused being shown to witnesses, the Court may not act on the evidence of test

3
Ratan lal and dhirajlal , th law of evidence , updated 23rd enlarged edition 2014,p 216
4
COMPILED BY
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE D.MURUGESAN
JUDGE, MADRAS HIGH COURT
20.01.2012
5
http://bvpnlcpune.org
 ARTICLE REVIEW : By Joshma

Voice Identification Evidence: A New jurisprudence Peter Condiliffe

The courts deal with the difficulty of the visual identification, photographic identification and
then the voice identification added to the existing difficulty. The author explained this in the
context of Australia. And the same was followed in some other countries including India. The
Indian courts Appreciates these evidences.

A fair hearing? The use of Voice Identification parades in criminal investigations in

England and Wales. Jeremy Robson

This article reviews the current state of the law in relation to the use of voice identification
parades to test the evidence of a witness who purports to recognize a witness by voice alone.
Such procedures exist but are not used consistently by police forces, with some forces having
decided as a matter of policy not to use them. Although such procedures are challenging and
are more difficult than video identification procedures, the failure to conduct such a parade is
a matter which should be properly taken into account in assessing the admissibility of a
witnesss evidence.

ARTICLE REVIEW by Deepthi

THE CONDUCT AND USES OF IDENTIFICATION PARADES 6

The authors in this article talk about the recent trend in reliability of identification parades
which are often used as a key part of prosecution evidence in our courts .The authors also
enquire into the procedure of identification and examine ways in which an identification
parade can be unfair to the suspect and lay down guidelines for the police in forming parades
. As social statisticians the authors have given particular attention to the statistical aspects of
identification parades. They also discuss whether identification parades should be used at all
as part of the prosecution evidence.

LEGAL ASPECT OF TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE7

The author discusses the importance of test identification Parade in criminal justice system
especially when accused is not previously known to the eye witness and does a detail study
regarding the procedure of Identification parade how it is held and who is competent to hold a
test identification parade. The author also discusses the evidentiary value of TIP when is it
required and when is it not required , in what circumstances

6
40 J. Crim. L. 198 1976
7
DEVI LATA RAWAT
Reseach Scholar (Law)
Barkatullah University Bhopal, M.P., Indian Streams Research Journal Volume 3 , Issue 5 , June 2013
 ARTICLE REVIEW: By Saketh Roy Vydyula

Bad character evidence as evidence of identity

- Emma Smith and Michael Stockdale
J. Crim. L. 12

The author of this article bases his comments and opinions on a case that has taken place,
which questions and simultaneously discusses the admissibility of bad character as evidence
of identification of an accused. When the case went to for trial it was understood by the judge
that the complainant based his case on the previous conduct of the accused as evidence for
identity. The author goes on to say that It is clear that evidence of the accused's bad character
may be admissible under for purposes other than establishing the accused's propensity (i.e.
that the important matter in issue to which such evidence is relevant may be a matter other
than propensity). He also opines that the strength of the evidence, in supporting identity, is
another matter entirely. Whilst it is accepted that such evidence can be admissible to establish
identity, as confirmed in the precedents, the extent to which the single previous conviction for
ABH ( Assault causing Battery) is capable of doing so is unclear. The probative value of the
previous conviction for ABH in supporting identity seems to turn upon the presence of a few,
rather fragile, similarities with the present charge.
 INTRODUCTION OF TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE
In criminal cases , the two important points that are to be decided are whether the alleged
offence was committed and if so who committed the offence . The object of conducting the
test identification parade of a person is the same as the identification of things or article .
Here also the evidence of test identification is only a supporting evidence and not substantive
evidence. it help only to corroborate the evidence of the identification of the witness.

The main objective of the test identification parade , during the investigation stage , is to test
the memory of the witness based upon first impression and also to enable to prosecution to
decide whether all or any of them to be cited as eye- witness if the crime . the purpose of the
test identification is to test and strengthen the trustworthiness of the evidence .

The proof of identification parade is a very important method regarding adducing evidences
in person by the competent witnesses. It is used to test the veracity of the evidence given by
the witness as well as it is important in the context of measurement of the status of the
investigation process i.e. whether it is going in the right direction or not. The basic objective
of the identification parade is to test the trustworthiness and the strength of the witness. The
important areas of consideration under this topic are regarding its evidentiary value,
circumstances of validity and invalidity of the evidence of identification parade, procedure of
taking identification parade, constitutional validity of the identification parade etc.

About the evidentiary value of the identification parade it is well settled that though it can be
a sole basis of conviction but it is submitted that it must act as a corroborative evidence to
avoid discrepancies. Until and unless it is evident that the eye witnesss memory in the
identification of the right accused cannot be questioned, it will be admitted8.

WHY IDENTIFICATON PARADE

It is true that where the identity of the accused is not known to the eye-witness, it is
essential for the investigating officer to get such suspect identified from eye-witness in a test
identification parade, which has mainly two works-

Ensures that investigation is proceeding on a right track,

Ensures that the eye-witnesss memory regarding the identity of the appellant. Test
identification parade is not sine qua non in every case if from circumstances the guilt
is established9. Identification is not necessary in those cases where the witness knows
the accused by name and where the witness knows the accused by name, the
identification parade would be a force10. The accused cannot be compelled to come to

8
Sir john woodroffe & syed Amir ali law of evidence ( lexis nexis , new delhi 2009 )
9
Visveswaran v. State, AIR 2003 SC 2471.
10
Suresh Ganpat Munde v. State Of Maharastra, 2000 (5) Bom CR 40.
 identification parade if he is undergoing treatment11. Oral testimony of a magistrate
regarding the successful identification of the accused would constitute substantive
evidence, if witness is denying giving evidence before a court. Here demeanour of
evidence is taken care12. Giving thumb impression or impression of foot or
palm or fingers or specimen writings or exposing parts of body for purpose of
identification are not included in the expression to be witness13.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
it is often important that to establish the identity of a person who a witness testifies that
he saw on a relevant occasion . Sometimes the witness will testify that he had seen the
persone before, or even knew the person well and therefore recognized the person
observed on the relevant occasion . But if the witness did not recognize the person he
might still testified that no one subsequent occasion . this subsequent occasion may have
been formal such as an identification parade or informal for instant seeing the person in
the street14.

WHEN TEST IDENTIFICATION IS NOT NECESSARY

When the accuse is arrested at the scene of occurrence , or is caught by the people
and produce before the police , It is not necessary to hold identification in the
absence of a request from the accuse15 . but not where the accused is arrested at
the spot after sometime of the incident 16 .
Where all the witness knew the accused before the occurrence and could
identified him but they did not know his name , holding of I.T parade was not
essential 17
Where the incident of murder took place during the day and the FIR was lodged
within an hour of the incident mentioning the name of the accused there as no
possibility of erroneous identity or concoction of a false story , non holding
identification parade did not matter .18
Where in a case of rash and negligent driving there was enough evidence to
identify the accused as a driver of the vehicle at the time of accident and his
identity was never in dispute , identification parade was not necessary 19.

11
K. Satnarayan v. State of AP, 1994 CriLJ 37 AP.
12
Ram Nath Mahto v. State of Bihar, AIR 1996 SC 2511
13
S v. Kathikalu, AIR 1961 SC 1808
14
Sir john woodroffe & syed Amir ali law of evidence ( lexis nexis , new delhi 2009)
15
State of UP V. Raju AIR 1971 SC708
16
Dhan Bahadur V. State 2008
17
Ambika Prasad V. State
18
Asha V. State of rajasthan AIR 1997 SC 2828
19
Francis Xavier Rodrigues V. state 1997
 Conducting IT parade was of no consequence where the murder was committed in
the hospital where the nurse , the ward boy and the patient admitted that they had
lot of opportunity to observe the accused and they were supporting the
prosecution case20.

INTRICACIES OF IDENTIFICATION:

Test Identification Parade is used in police investigation is Test Identification i.e. a

process by which the identity of persons, things or animals concerned in the offence under
investigation or trail is established through a test parade.

Test identification parades are held both in civil and criminal cases to identify.

1. persons living or dead, known or known

2. Recovered property/articles including fire arms
3. Photographs, fingerprints, footprints, handwritings, voice.

Mostly, test identification parades are held in criminal case to prove or disprove the guilt
or innocence of the accused whether it is held in respect of person or articles.21

MISTAKE OF IDENTITY:

In this process of identification it is usual for witnesses to make mistakes of identity

when a large number of persons are concerned in committing a crime. It is a question of fact
not of law.22

IDENTIFICATION OF THINGS:

During investigations it may sometimes be necessary to conduct test identifications of

things involved in criminal cases.

(1) It should be noted that

(a) A test identification of properties which do not bear any special marks of
identification is of immense value in enhancing the credibility of identification
evidence in court23; and

(b) A test identification of properties which bear definite marks of identification is not
necessary.

(2) When a witness states that he can identify properties connected with a case under
investigation, the following should be ascertained24:

20
Referring officer V. Arja Narsimha Rao 2001
21
Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Law of evidence, Updated 23 rd enlarged edition, (Lexis Nexis, Gurgaon) 2014, p
250
22
Sir John woodroffe & Syed Amir Ali Law of evidence (Lexis nexis, New Delhi, 2009)
23
http://police.pondicherry.gov.in/Police%20manual
 (a) Their descriptions and other marks of identification,

(b) The circumstances under which he had previously seen them,

(c) The several occasions during which he had previously handled them 25, and any
other relavent circumstances

IDENTIFICATION OF VICTIMS BODY:

Where the dead body of Victim is in a stage of decomposed condition or beyond

recognition, then the relatives of victim who were enough aware of features of his body
would be considered as evidences. All these kind of evidences would be corroborated from
the articles found on the dead bodies and serologists reports and where in circumstances of
case, identification of the victims is established.26

IDENTITY OF DECEASED-SUPERIMPOSITION:

In cases involving rape and murder, the prosecution witness deposed that the
photograph of the deceased was sent by him for superimposition test to Forensic Science
Laboratory where superimposition of the skeletal remains of the deceased was conducted
with reference to the photograph which show the age of deceased which would later
corroborated by the reports of the medical examiners 27 . It could also be found based on
photograph of the victim.28

Identification can also be established from finger impressions left on the scene. Finger
impressions found on the scene can be developed and tested to find out whether they tally
with those of the suspected persons or not. Foot impressions left on the scene can also be
lifted and compared later with foot impressions of the suspects.29

IMPORTANCE OF IDENTIFICATION PRIOR TO TIP:

The substantive evidence of a witness is the statement made in the court. The
identification of accused by a witness for the first time during the trial, from its very nature,
inherently would be weak. The purpose of prior test identification is to strengthen the
trustworthiness of the witnesses. The Supreme Court in the case Rameswar Singh vs. State of
Jammu & Kashmir reported in 1972 (SC 102) has held that in the absence of any test
identification parade, excluding the statement made U/S 161 Cr.PC, the statement by
witnesses at the trial, when they did not know the accused before the occurrence could not be
relied upon30. In another case reported in 1976, SriRam vs. State the Supreme Court held that

24
Dilip Mahendra Thapa v State of Maharashtra , 2003 CrLJ 4280
25
Mahesh Chandra v. state of M.P. 2005 CrLJ 2480 para (11)
26
Sir John woodroffe & Syed Amir Ali Law of evidence (Lexis nexis, New Delhi, 2009)
27
Golkonda venkateshwara Rao vs State of A.P. AIR 2003 SC 2846
28
http://police.pondicherry.gov.in
29
http://bvpnlcpune.org
30
Rameshwar Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir AIR 1972 SC 102
identification made during the trial is not of much value unless it is corroborated by the prior
identification.31

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IDENTIFICATION OF PERSON AND PROPERTY:

Identification of persons:

It is well settled that for certain purpose photographs may be received in evidence.
But here also the same principle has got to be observed, namely identification should be
done from a number of photographs of similar looking persons 32 . The other means of
identification that are prevalent and accepted by the Court of Law are

a. Finger Print

b. Foot Print or Shoe Print

c. Hand Writing

d. By Voice.

The evidence of such identification except by voice is generally by experts on the

subjects whose testimonies are admissible ills 45 the Evidence Act.

Identification of property:

Identification of property needs also enough precaution, which consists of sealing of

the properties to the identified and similar sealing of the properties to be mixed in the T.I.
parade. The Police Officer who takes the sealed bundles to the Thana after recover and also
take the Magistrate for identification should be examined to prove that the sealed bundles
were not tampered within any way. 33 The sealed bundles should be opened before the
Magistrate conducting the T.I. parade. This evidence is also relevant u/s 9 of the Evidence
Act. While the identification parade of the prisoner can be conducted by a Magistrate, there is
no provision that identification of property should be conducted by the Magistrate.34

31
Sri ram v. state
32
Harnath Singh v State of M.P AIR 1950 Lah 167
33
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/45012/11/11
34
http://www.academia.edu
 IDENTIFICATION OF A PERSON

Identification Parade is one of the methods to identify the person by or victim of

the crime or by witnesses. Test Identification Parade is conducted to find out whether the
suspect is the real offender or not, only when in case of the suspect is not known and he was a
stranger and had seen first time at the scene of offence by the victim. If he is already known,
the identification becomes worthless 35 . The mere identification of a person in Test
Identification is not enough to make a person convict. The facts should be corroborated with
the evidence given by the witnesses before the court36. The Test Identification Parade rises
only when the accused is unknown to the victim and witnesses. There is no provision in
Criminal Procedure Code that the investigating agency to conduct Test Identification Parade
as a right of the accused to claim37. The accused has a right to ask for Test Identification
Parade, when the victim is not known to him. If there is any failure to conduct the Test
Identification Parade, it does not adversely affect the prosecution case 38.If the suspect refused
to appear in the parade, the adverse reference can be drawn against him39. If he refused on the
ground that he was already known to the witnesses then the identification has no value and
adverse inference cannot be drawn against him 40 . The accused refused to appear in the
Parade, the court held that witness identified him in the court is admissible and that can be
taken41.

The test Identification Parade is conducted at the time of investigation by police officer on
the ground that the victim should not forget the accused, if it is taken place during
investigation, otherwise, the victim may forget the accused if it taken place after a long
period42. In identification parade the person would be identified in a group of people. The
group of people may be civilian persons or suspects, who are suspected by the police officer
and make him to appear in the parade. At the time of the Test Identification Parade, the
accused should not be shown to the witnesses. Before the trail and during the investigation
the suspect should not be shown to the witness. The suspect should be only shown at the trail
in the dock to the witness. If the suspect is shown during investigation then that identification

35
PHIPSON ON EVIDENCE, Edn 12th, (2002), page 387 (Para 15-02)
36
Sarkar, Law of Evidence, (Lexis Nexis Butterwords Wadhwa), Nagpur 2012, page 538
37
Sarkar, Law of Evidence, (Lexis Nexis Butterwords Wadhwa), Nagpur 2012 pg.no536.
38
Sarkar, Law of Evidence, (Lexis Nexis Butterwords Wadhwa), Nagpur 2012, pg.no 541.
39
Anil Kumar V. State, 1996 Cri LJ 2491.
40
Hari Shanker V. State, 1985 CrLJ 1700 (Del).
41
Mohinder Singh V. State, ILR (1970) 2 (DEL) 854.
42
S.K. Hasib V. State Of Bihar, AIR 1972 SC 283.
becomes worthless. Test Identification Parade is not held then dock identification by child
witness of age 6 years in court cannot treated as reliable43. Test Identification was considered
necessary where a sole child witness to murder of his mother told the police that three
assailants were involved44.

The accused can be identified by the victim through his voice, speech, gait and other marks
on his face, his appearance, tattoo marks, etc45. Sometimes the accused takes defence on the
lack of light, that those offences which are committed under no light. His contention was that,
if the offence was committed in the dark place (i.e.; in presence of moon light) the offenders
face may not be clear and cannot be recognized by the witnesses whos presence is a little far
from the scene of offence. In such circumstance, the witness can identify him through his gait
or appearance, even though his face cannot be seen by the witness. Same as the victim in that
moonlight he may not able to see his face but he can identify through his gait or speech in
Test Identification Parade. Even though there was no sufficient light, where the two witnesses
were injured by the accused, where they have opportunity to see him very closely even in an
insufficient light and also they could have been identified by voice, gait and by features. 46 In
a case, the appellant and other accused persons assaulted the deceased at night. His grandson
was a witness, who identified the appellant through his gait, voice and speech. The court held
that the evidence given by the witness that he identified the appellant through his voice
cannot be discarded because of the reason that he had not identified the other assailants 47. In
case of gang rape, the persons who committed the offence were not known to the victim
previously. So, the court held in these cases the Test Identification should be held48. The
Supreme Court held that where a large number of persons participated in a crime, two
witness theory is adopted to identify the accused persons. If an accused is identified by two or
more witnesses then the accused persons can be convicted. If an accused is identified by on
one witness and not more than one, then the accused gains benefit of doubt49.

43
Sarkar, Law of Evidence, (Lexis Nexis Butterwords Wadhwa), Nagpur 2012, pg.no 535.
44
Mulla V. State Of U.P, AIR 2010 SC 942,
45
WIGMORE, Vol.2, Section 660, p. 771.
46
State Of U.P V. Manohar Lal And Ors, AIR 1981
47
Dalbir Singh V. State Of Haryana, AIR 2008 SC 2389
48
Ramchandran V. Station House Officer, 1999 CrLJ 1180 (Mad).
49
Chandra Shekhar V. State Of Bihar, 2001 CrLJ 4693 (SC).
 IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED IN DIFFERENT OFFENCES:

If an accused is charged for two separate dacoity cases in two different courts, where the test
identification Parade is done in one case and witnesses identifies him as the real offender, that
identification does not be taken into consideration for the next dacoity case. The Supreme
Court held in one of the case, that the facts and circumstances changes for every case even
though the cases are in similar nature50. Where as in a circumstance, where there are two
suspects in whom their appearance is quite dissimilar, if these two suspects are presented in a
same Test Identification Parade then that identification is not fair. So, in a case the Supreme
Court held that in such circumstance two parades should be held 51. In cases like dacoity,
Identification of one person in a group of four members is not sufficient for conviction. But if
he can identify three members correctly in the same four members can be taken, to guilt the
accused.

PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING T.I.P

One of the methods for establishing the identity of the accused is Test Identification Parade
.A test Identification Parade (TIP) is a procedure where the alleged offender is brought before
the witnesses and victims for identification . To understand the procedure of holding a TIP
we need to understand as to who can conduct a TIP who are (a) police (b) private person (c)
Magistrate52 .

TIP CONDUCTED BY POLICE:

In the case of Dilip Mahendra Thapa v State of Maharashtra 53The Supreme Court stated
Where an Identification Parade is conducted by the police , the evidence of such
identification either of the property or of the person is hit by the provision of section 162 of
54
CrPC .Ramakishan v State So also would be the identification of the accused in the
presence of the police by the witnesses in the light of the police van and would amount to a
statement made to such police officers during the course of investigation and would be
absolutely of no use of the prosecution . Kanta Prashad v. Delhi Admn.55 Where TIP is
conducted by police it should fall within the limitations of section 162 of CrPC , where it can

50
Chander Singh V. State, AIR 1973 SC 1200
51
Ganesh Bhagwati Pandian V. State Of Maharastra, 1985 CrLJ 191 (Bombay)
52
Sir John woodroffe & Syed Amir Ali law of evidence (lexis nexis , New Delhi , 2009 )
53
Dilip Mahendra Thapa v State of Maharashtra , 2003 CrLJ 4280, law of evidence
54
Ramkishan v state AIR 1955 SC 104
55
Kanta Prashad v. Delhi Admn. AIR 1958 SC 350
be used only for the purpose of contradicting him under section 145 of Indian Evidence Act
and cannot at all be used for corroborating him . Consequently a test identification held by
the police nullifies the object of using the identification for corroborating the testimony given
by the identifier before the court . In cases where the services of a magistrate cannot be
secured the police officers can hold an identification parade and make use of the statements
incorporated in the identification memorandum in the same way as any of the statement
recorded by the police during the investigation that is , within the scope of Sec 162 of CrPC .
In Harnath Singh v State of M.P56 A naib Tehsildar , athird class magistrate who held an
identification was held to be competent to do so and such identification was admissible in
evidence . Sri Ram V s. State the Supreme Court held that identification made during the trial
is not of much value unless it is corroborated by the prior identification.

IDENTIFICATION UNDER SUPERVISION OF MAGISTRATE :

Test Identification conducted by magistrate is preferred to identification conducted by any

other person . The Magistrates identification memo is a record of formal statement which the
identifier expressly or impliedly made before him . The statement can be used normally for
contradicting him under section 145 or section 155 of Indian Evidence Act and also or
corroborating him under section 157 .57

Identification has to be done under the supervision of a Magistrate . The court emphazied in
the case In Re Narayan 58There is a great responsibility of the part of the magistrate to see
that it is dont with due care and precaution as to not infringe life and liberty of the accused ,
to secure his rights and give him a fair chance .

PRESENCE OF POLICE :

Test Identification should be done genuinely and properly . The main consideration for the
court should be whether the test identification was conducted in a fair and reasonable manner
.59 In JamanaDas Parsharam v State of M.P 60No police should be present in the vicinity
where the parade is conducted and police should not be with the identifying witness even for
some time prior to the parade . when the police arranged for identification parade to be held

56
Harnath Singh v State of M.P AIR 1950 Lah 167
57
Ratanlal and dhirajlal, The law of evidence, updated 23rd enlarged edition,(lexis nexis , gurgaon ) 2014,p 250
58
In Re Narayan AIR 1965 MP 225
59
Sarkar , The Code of Criminal Procedure ( LexisNexis , Butterwords , Wadhva , Nagpur , 2012 ) pg 561
60
JamanaDas Parsharam v State of M.P AIR 1963 MP 106
by the panchas , the statements made by the witnesses to the panchas would be outside
section162 of CrPC , provided police have been kept away from the place of the parade .
Identification parades shall be conducted by a Judicial Magistrate at the Jail as far as possible.
While making arrangements for the parade, the Police Officers should completely efface
themselves, leaving it to the Magistrate to conduct the actual identification proceedings. In
Hazrat Ali v State of Assam 61the court said that the magistrate must make sure that the
witness is a stranger to the suspect , otherwise the whole identification becomes a farce .

Though there is no bar on identification parade to be held by the police , as regard the police
officer who seeks to prove the fact of test identification , such evidence of his would attract
sec 162 and would be inadmissible in evidence . The purpose of such prior identification is to
strengthen the trustworthiness of the evidence of the witnesses.

MIXING

The accused should as far as possible be mingled with persons of similar description, status,
build and age . 62 In the case of Thambi Nasir v State 63
In TIP the number of dummies per
accused should be in the ratio of 1:4 or 1:6 and the dummies placed with the accused should
be of similar appearance to the accused and generally not more than two accused should b
placed in one identification parade .In Haresh Mahadeo Kamble v State of Maharshtra 64
Where in identification parade the dummies placed along with the accused were not of
similar appearance and 6 accused were put up for identification where only 4 dummiess were
used to stand alongside to the accused the court held that identification parade was not
reliable as proper mixing ratio was not followed. What is important is not the number of
lapses but the nature of lapses committed . If the nature of the lapses is such that it becomes
possible for the witness to deduce as to who can be accused persons , then the lapse must be
said to be of fatal nature .

Identification only in court effect : In R . N Patel v State of Gujarat 65It was held by the
apex court that it cannot be held that in the absence of TIP , the evidence of eye-witnesses the
accused for the first time during trial would become inadmissible or totally useless . The
credence of such evidence would always depend on the facts and circumstances of each case .

61
Hazrat Ali v State of Assam 1983 CrLJ (N0C) 61
62
Ratanlal and dhirajlal, The law of evidence, updated 23rd enlarged edition, 2014,p 261
63
Thambi Nasir v State , 2003 , CrLJ 493
64
Haresh Mahadeo Kamble v State of Maharshtra 2002 CrLJ 1297
65
R . N Patel v State of Gujarat 1999 CrLJ 5013
In the case of Dana Yadav v State of Bihar 66Identification for the first time during trial is
inherently of a very weak character which loses much of its value without prior TIP . In
Ramnath Naik v State67Identification for the first time in court cannot be relied upon in
absence of corroboration , however in exceptional situation it can form basis for conviction ,
in Madhukar Damu Patil v State of Maharashtra 68such as where the victim had plenty of
time to recognize the accused while he removed the gold ornaments from her neck in broad
daylight and she had given a description in the F.I.R identification by her for the first time in
court was not vitiated by non conduct of T.I.Parade where she had an an occasion to see the
accused for a considerable amount of time .

DELINQUENCIES

Delay in holding T. I. Parade :In Shabad Pulla Reddy v State of A.P69: The identification
should be held as early as possible after thye arrest of the accused , because the impression in
the mind of the witness may fade in course of time . Whenever there is a delay in holding a
TI Parade the prosecution should give a reasonable explanation failing to which will detract
from value of the test . The Supreme Court In Santosh Singh v Izhar Hussain 70 held that
the test identification parade should be held within reasonavle time , where TI Parade was
held after 3 or 4 months of arrest of the accused persons and no explanation was given
T.I.Parade was held to be unreliable . 71

72
Failure to Conduct T.I.Parade : Gangaram v state of M.P The purpose of holding
T.I.Parade is to test the veracity of the witness on the question of identity . Non holding of it
would render unsafe the reliance on the evidence of such witness . In Bharat Singh v State of
UP SC73The test Identification parades are essentially goverened by section 162 of CrPc .
Failure to hold them would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in court .
Where the departmental witness whom the accused was unknown was uncorroborated by

66
Dana Yadav v State of Bihar , AIR 2002 SC 3325
67
Ramnath Naik v State 1995 CrLJ 2255 (para5)
68
Madhukar Damu Patil v State of Maharashtra 1996 CrLJ 1019 (para 2)68
69
Shabad Pulla Reddy v State of A.P ,AIR 1997 SC 3087

70
Santosh singh v Izhar Hussain AIR 1973 SC P.2100
71
Sarkar , The Code of Criminal Procedure ( LexisNexis , Butterwords , Wadhva , Nagpur , 2012 ) pg 561
72
Gangaram v state of M.P 1994 CrLJ NOC 381 (MP)
73
Bharat Singh v State of UP AIR1972 SC 2748
independent witnesses still no Test Identificationwas held , the accused was entitled to benefit
of doubt .74

VALUE OF TEST IDENTIFICATION

The substantive evidence of a witness is the statement made in the court. The identification of
accused by a witness for the first time during the trial, from its very nature, inherently would
be weak. The purpose of prior test identification is to strengthen the trustworthiness of the
witnesses. The Supreme Court in the case reported in 1976, Sri Ram V s. State the Supreme
Court held that identification made during the trial is not of much value unless it is
corroborated by the prior identification.
The statement made by witness in course of T.I. proceeding is neither substantive evidence
nor it is admissible in evidence till the person who made such statement is examined in the
court (Sec. 9 of Indian Evidence Act become relevant here). Such a statement, however,
made before a Police Officer when the T.I. parade is being held is hit u/s 162 Cr.PC and
thereby becomes inadmissible. The statement may be express or implied 75 . The person
identified may either nod his head or give his assent in answer to a question addressed to him
in that behalf or make a sign of or gesture which tantamount to saying that the particular
property was the subject matter of the offence or the person identified was concerned in the
offence.

In the nutshell, principles behind the identification parade are as follows

Acts as corroborative part of evidence to assist substantive evidence,
Object to test the memory of the witnesses based upon first impression and enable the
prosecution to decide whether any witness can be cited as eye-witness,
To show witness test identification parade would be held soon after the arrest of the
accused,

Honble Supreme Court of India in Bahris case, 76 laid down that identification of the
accused soon after his arrest is very important as it helps in two ways
investigation is proceeding on a right direction,
helps as a corroborative evidence.

The evidence of identity must be thoroughly scrutinized, giving benefit of all doubts to the
accused. Conviction can be made basing on such evidence in the rarest of rare case77. The
admissibility of such evidence depends on the bona fide true nature of the witness. However
what weight should be given the identification parade is the matter of discretion of the court.
In a case where the evidence of the prosecutrix was found to be reliable, court held that there
was no need of corroboration78. It should not be accepted unless free from all reasonable
doubts and must be scrutinized with greater care and cautio.

74
Ratanlal and dhirajlal, The law of evidence, updated 23rd enlarged edition, 2014,p 261
75
76
S.C. Bahris v. UOI, AIR 1994 SC 2420
77
Ramesh kumar Soni v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1997 CriLJ 3418 (MP)
78
Malkhan singh v. State of M.P., AIR 2003 SC 2669
 CONVICTIONS BASED ON Test Identification Parade :
Convictions can be based only on TIP when the testimony of the witness after or before
identifications was beyond suspicion. 79 If the delay in conducting the TIP occurs and is
explained as to the non existence of any possibility of the accused having been shown to the
witness whose evidence of identification is considered reliable, in such a situation conviction
can be based on such an evidence80.

It is not a hard and fast rule that a conviction shall or shall not be based on a TIP solely,
whereas it is a rule of prudence that differs from each and every circumstance and case.

In Tahir mohammed vs state of Madhya Pradesh 81 the dacoits looted the bus at 11pm at
night. The witnesses, passengers or the inmates of the bus did not give any credible statement
or evidence as to the description of the dacoits in their earlier statements in court. The
accused were detained in the police station for two days without any explanation.
Identification of the accused by the witness by any margin of error created suspicion in the
mind of the court and hence the conviction was set aside.

The accused persons were alleged to have committed dacoity and rape of two women at
night in the house of the complainant at the relevant time a lantern was burning in the house
which provided the victims with enough light to see the faces of the accused and remember
them. The accused while committing rape, came in close proximity to the prosecutrix and
also snatched away the gold ornaments. Therefore based on the above facts the test
identification done by the two complainants was held reliable and the accused were subjected
to conviction.82

Where identification parade which was held 49 days after the arrest of the accused, 2
witnesses identified the accused correctly but the other 2 witness committed a mistake in
identifying the co accused, thus the identification evidence was nheld not to be sufficient for
the conviction of the accused.83

79
Ramesh Kumar Soni Vs. State Of MP, 1997 Cr LJ 3418
80
Ramesh Chandra Lenka Vs. State Of Orrisa,1995 Cr LJ 3178 (paras 6-8)
81
Tahir Mohammed Vs. State Of Madhya Pradesh,1993 Cr LJ
82
Govind Vitoba Kengar Vs. State Of Maharashtra, 2003 Cr LJ Para 12
83
Raghubar Singh Vs. State Of UP 2004 Cr LJ 1866
GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS IN HOLDING IDENTIFICATION PARADE
There should be at least 10 under trials for each suspect. The proper way to put up each
suspect separately for identification mixed with at least nine or ten persons. Less than that
number considerably diminishes the value of identification84. In a case where 36 dummies
were used for identifying 6 accused, it was said as in violation of guidelines. Hence evidence
of holding parade was not admissible85.
The suspect should be placed amongst persons who are as far as possible of the same age,
height, general appearance86 including standard of dress and grooming and position in life.

The number of dummies per accused should be in the ratio of 1:4 or 1:6. Generally not more
than two accused should be put for the identification parade.

The value of identification evidence depends on the factors which minimize the possibility of
chance as much as possible. An accused has no right to cover his face while the TI parade is
going on. Hence it is necessary that sufficient number of dummies should be mixed and each
accused should be put to identification parade separately.

PRECAUTIONS IN HOLDING IDENTIFICATION PARADE87

The basic precaution must be taken in this context is that of concealment of the distinctive
marks and conditions necessary for proper identification which would be acceptable by all
like presence of small pox marks on the body. So in such cases persons having same
character must be mixed with the accused. The purpose of the TI parade is futile when the
accused and the police officials were present at the police station at the time of identification
parade. Prior to an ad hoc confrontation identification, a note should be made to the witnesss
description of the offender88. Burden of proof in such cases lies on the Prosecution that the TI
parade was held and also strictly in accordance with the rules.

In the case of Anthony v. State of Maharashtra89, it was held that the identification parade
should not be held in police station buildings but separate rooms should be reserved for
holding the identification parade in the separate building. The identification should be held in
such circumstances which should not be influenced by the presence of police of their
influence90. The Supreme Court vide the Judgment91 has held that identification of property
or person by a witness in an identification parade held by the Police amounts to a statement
to the Police and attracts the provisions of section 162 of the Code of Criminal procedure.
Thus even though there is no bar to the holding of identification parade by the police the
value of such parades for the prosecution is very much reduced92 as the statements recorded
during such parade cannot be used for the purpose of corroborating the identifying witnesses
at the trial93.

84
Anwar v. S, AIR 1961 All 50.
85
Haresh Mahadeo Kamla v. State Of Maharastra, 2002 Cri LJ 1297 (Bom).
86
Thambi nasir v. State, 2003 Cri LJ 429 (Bom).
87
Module No 1 Recap On Police Procedures And Investigation, Parade
88
R v. Vaughan, The Independent, May, 12, 1997 (CA).
89
Anthony v. State of Maharashtra, 2003 (4) Mah LJ 894 (Bom).
90
Sir John Woodroffe & Syed Amir Ali, Law of Evidence, ( Lexis Nexis; New Delhi,2009)
91
1955 Criminal Law Journal 196
92
Sarkar, The Code of Criminal Procedure, ( Lexis Nexis Butterwords Wadhwa; Nagpur,2012
93
Ratanlal& DhirajLal,Law of Evidence, (Lexis Nexis;Gurgoan,2013),
It is therefore, necessary that identification parades should as for as possible be conducted by
a magistrate or if no magistrate is available, by panchas (independent respectable persons)
and the Police should completely withdraw before the commencement of the identification.94
It should however, by clearly understood that the observation made by the Supreme Court in
the above mentioned case do not in any way prevent the police from holding an identification
parade.

CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE TEST IDENTIFICATION

PARADE
Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India states that no person accused of any offence shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself. At times of identification, it may be necessary to
expose parts of the body, in which case the question would arise whether a person suspected
of an offence can be compelled to expose his body, and whether the right of the suspect under
the Constitution would be violative. In the case of state of Bombay v. Kathikalu95, it has been
held that exposing parts of body for purpose of identification does not offend Article 20 (3) of
the Constitution of the India.

94
Ratanlal& DhirajLal,Law of Evidence, updated 23rd enlarged edition
95
Bombay v. Kathikalu, AIR 1961 SC 1808.