ASSIGNMENT

TOPIC – TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

SUBJECT – EVIDENCE LAW
ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED TO

FACULTY OF LAW , UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW

For the partial fulfillment of the requirement in

B.A.LL.B( Hons.) -VI SEM (SECTION A)

Under guidance of:. Submitted by :

MR . SHOBHIT KUMAR RASTOGI SHAILJA YADAV

FACULTY OF LAW ROLL NO.- 200013015035

UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW

FACULTY OF LAW

UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW
LUCKNOW ,UP

2022-23

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Evidence Law

teacher Mr Shobhit Kumar Rastogi who gave me the golden opportunity to do
this wonderful project on the topic Test Identification Parade helped me in
learning new things through a lot of research .

I would also like to thank Dean of Law Faculty ,Professor B.D Singh for
providing all the help that was required in completing the assignment.

Lastly ,I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in
finalizing this assignment within the limited time frame.

The success and final outcome of this assignment required a lot of guidance and
assistance from many people and I am fortunate to get all the support for
completing this assignment.

Their guidance and assistance was really helpful in bringing this work to a
conclusion.

2
 INDEX
.
S.NO. TOPIC PAGE NO.

1
INTRODUCTION
4

2
PROCEDURE
5-8
3. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF 9
TEST IDENTIFICATION
PARADE
7.
PROCESS AFTER TEST 10
IDENTIFICATION
PARADE
8. JOINT TEST 11
IDENTIFICATION
PARADE
9. LANDMARK 12
JUDGEMENT

10 CONCLUSION 13

11. BIBLIOGRAPHY 14

3
 INTRODUCTION

This is a technique primarily used in criminal cases to identify the accused in court.
The idea of this procedure is to see if witnesses can identify the accused among
various people. The Indian Evidence Act, of 1872 deals, inter alia, with the
admissibility and inadmissibility of evidence in court, including the examination of
witnesses and the evidentiary value of documents submitted to the Court of First
Instance.
Test identification is useful to law enforcement, not as evidence in court. Judges
are off duty in test identification parade arrangements, largely like police, but if an
identifier misidentifies her, the whole investigation could well be sidetracked and
the investigation never resolved in an identification parade.
A disadvantage to testing Is that this is a parade recommendation to officers that
specific procedures must be clearly explained to investigators and that police
should not be involved during inspection identification parades. Governments
should increase their capacity to conduct test identification parades. It’s carried out
in its usual location, but the windows should be tinted so that these key people can
see what’s going on instead of the judges, etc .
The Test Identification Parade is governed by Section 540-A of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 and Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

PURPOSE
The Idea of this process is to check whether the witness can identify the accused
among the various several individuals. This will establish the fidelity of the witness
in identifying an unknown person related to the context of the offense.

LAW GOVERNING TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

4
Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 54A of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 deal with the procedure and the legality of the Test
Identification Parade.

Section 9 of the Evidence Act makes the test of identification of proper accused
and properties admissible and relevant facts in a court of Law, but this act does not
make it obligatory for the accused to present for the Test Identification Parade by
the investigating officer.
The problem of Section 9 of the Evidence Act Is tackled in Section 54A of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This section says that when the identification
of an accused by the witness is considered necessary for investigation of such
offense in which the accused is arrested, the Court, having jurisdiction, may on the
request of the officer in charge of a police station, direct the accused so arrested to
subject himself to identification by witness or witnesses in such manner as the
Court may deem fit.

PROCEDURE
As mentioned above Witness plays an important role in the Test Identification
Parade when the witness informs the Officer in Charge that he can identify the
accused or other persons connected with the offense then the officer in charge will
arrange for the Test Identification Parade.
Officer In-charge should ask the following questions to the witness to create nearly
the same environment in which the witness has seen the accused and should
mention it in the case diary. These questions are:
Accused description.
• The extent of prevailing light at the time of the offence (daylight, moonlight,
flashing of torches, burning kerosene, electric or gas lights, etc).
• Details of opportunities of seeing the accused at the time of the offense;
anything outstanding in the features or conduct of the accused which
impressed him (identifier).
• Distance from which he saw the accused.
• The extent of time during which he saw the accused.

5
• Officer in charge or any other police officer should be expunged from the
real Test Identification Parade.
• The judicial Magistrate shall commence the Test Identification Parade.
• If Judicial Magistrate is not available then arrange for two or more
respectable members of the society. But these Officer in charge has to make
sure that these people don’t have any link to the accused or any witness.
• An identification parade should be commenced immediately after the arrest
of the accused without any delay.
• If a case has more than one accused and only one or few accused got
arrested then the identification parade of the arrested accused shall be
arranged don’t postpone the parade. And as the remaining accused got
arrested Identification parade should be arranged for them as well.
• Inform the accused person that he/she will be put up for the Identification
Parade.
• Witnesses or Witnesses should be kept out of the sight of the accused. And
make sure that witness and people standing for the parade has no mode of
any communication or signals.
• Accused should be mingled with the different look-alike in the ratio of 1:5 or
1:10 and they all should stand in a line.
• In the case of many witnesses, they should be call one by one and asked to
point out the accused if any.
• There should be a complete record of the proceeding even the mistake
committed by the witness or the witnesses in identifying the accused.
• Care should be taken that the two-witness won’t mingle with each other.
Especially if identification is already done by one witness and another
witness is still yet to go for identification. This will beat the whole purpose
of the Identification Parade.
• If officials doubt that witnesses had talked to each other then they have to
reshuffle the whole parade and the accused is made to take different
positions.
• If the accused has any objection while the parade it should be well recorded.
• After the Test Identification Parade is over a duly sign certificate must be
given by the Magistrate who has conducted the Parade.
• Because identification is done in jail jailor should be informed about the
Identification Parade on the admission of the suspect.

6
 • And clear instruction should be given to the jailor to not change the
appearance of the admitted accused or his clothes before the identification
parade.
• If the witness is injured then the officer should take written permission from
the concerned medical authority before bringing the witness for the Test
Identification Parade to identify the assailant.
• If permission is given by the medical authority, then the officer should
arrange the transport of the witness immediately.
• If the witness is not fit and cannot be taken to the nearest court, police
station, or jail then the Identification Parade can be organized on the
premises of the hospital.
• If the witness is declared unfit to be present at the Identification Parade, then
the Officer In-charge should wait until the medical authority gives the proper
certificate that the witness is fit for the identification parade.
• And if the witness can’t attain the parade and identify his assailant because
he is unwell then the officer in charge should submit the evidence which
suffices the reason why the parade can’t be held.
Identification of accused by Photograph
• A witness can be asked to identify the accused from the photograph when
the accused is not in custody.
• Every police station has a photographic record of the history sheeters. These
photographs can be shown to the witness for identification.
• A bunch of photographs should be shown to the witness among which there
is the real photograph of the accused. And the witness should be asked to
identify the accused from among these photographs.
• It should also be ensured that the photograph of the accused does not
become public through media or some other channels.
• But after the accused is arrested regular identification parade should also be
held.
Test Identification of the Property
In criminal cases sometimes identification of the object used in the crime becomes
necessary, for this purpose Identification of Property is done.

7
When a witness claim that he can identify the properties connected with the case
under investigation Police Officer In charge of the case should ask the following
questions:
Description of the property.
• If it has any unique identification mark.
• If the witness has seen this property earlier under any circumstances.
• If the witness has handled the property earlier.
• Or any other relevant circumstances.
• An object which does not have any special Identification Mark has more
evidential value than the object that bears Special Identification Mark.
• Find out whether or not bargaining struck at the time of the purchase.
Reason- The purchase of the property at the lower or the higher price from the
market value on that particular day without any bargain will share some light on
the nature of the transaction and the intention of the buyer or seller.
• The date, Time, and Place of such purchase should be mentioned and
registered in the dairy.
Reason- The date will help in establishing the timeline between the time of
purchase and the time of theft. And the time and place will help in finding whether
the transaction was bonafide or not.
• Officer in charge should make a clear record of the following thing in the
case diary:
a. The nature of the article
b. Age of the seller,
c. His status in life
d. His social group,
e. Age of the receiver,
f. His status in life.

Reason- These circumstances will help to find that the transaction was honest or
dishonest. If a normal person makes a sale of a valuable article like jewels which is
not even worn by anyone in his social group also then this looks suspicious on the
part of the seller. If a young person makes a sale of something really valuable then
it’s suspicious too.

8
It should be mention clearly In the case diary by the officer in charge of the places
search to find the stolen property and how it was recovered. Evidence that the
stolen property was buried underground or was concealed in the walls or secreted
in back yards or houses, etc., will help to establish the nature of the property.

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

A magistrate’s order requiring a person to attend test identification parade does not
violate his fundamental right under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The
identification of the accused at TIP by someone not accused’s own act. His mere
attendance or exhibition of body cannot be regarded as furnishing any positive
volitional evidentiary act.
Article 20(3)of the Constitution of India is also not violated by compelling an
accused to stand up and show his face for the purpose of identification. It does not
amount to giving of testimony as to the final facts. He can also be ordered to
disclose any scar or mark on his body for the purpose of identification.
During the course of investigation, witnesses may say that they will identify the
culprits, if they were shown to them, they will identify the properties, if the
properties are produced before them. Therefore, the necessity of holding of testof
identification parade during the investigation is necessary to test the memory and
veracity of the witness does arise.
The evidence which requires particular attention is identification evidence, which
resembles confession evidence in being, at the same time, both extremely
compelling and potentially unreliable. Witnesses are frequently required to identify
persons whom they have only seen fleetingly and often in confused circumstances.
The identification of the perpetrator is often the only issue that needs to be
determined in a criminal trial.
Mistaken identity may often occur in good faith, but the effects can be extremely
serious for the defendant and, for this reason, there is an obvious need for caution
in relation to such evidence.

9
PROCESS AFTER TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE
After the Identification Parade of person or property is over it should be verified
and ensured by the investigation officer that the proceeding of the parade matches
the details recorded by him/her in the case diary.
The Investigating Officer should remember that the Magistrate who recorded the
Identification Parade of the accused person is cited as a witness in the memo of
evidence to speak about the conduct of the Identification Parade and to mark the
report of the parade.

EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

Identification of the accused by the witness in the Test Identification Parade is a
shred of primary evidence but not substantive evidence it is used to support the
identification of the accused by the witness in a court of law. On the other hand, if
the witness identifies the accused in the court of the law, then it is substantive
evidence.
Interestingly if the Test Identification Parade is not held earlier and the witness
identifies the accused for the first time in the court of law then the Identification
Parade is no longer required if the court found it trustworthy.
The general rule is that the witness identifying the accused in the court alone is not
the basis of the conviction of the accused unless it is ratified by the previous Test
Identification Parade. But there are some exceptions to this rule.

FACETS OF TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

Evidence of sniffer dogs:

In Abdul Razzaq v. State of Maharashtra , it was held by the Supreme Court that
the evidence of dog tracking is admissible but ordinarily, is not of much weight.
The possibly of misunderstanding between the dog and its master is close to its
heels. The possibility of misrepresenting or wrong inference from the behaviour of
dogs cannot be ruled out.

10
Identification by finger print:
The accepted conclusion of science is that several fixed and typical variety of
ridges on fingertips are clearly distinguishable and that the chance of two
individuals bearing the same combination of such marks are so small as to be
negligible. Hence identity of finger marks is the strongest evidence of the identity
of person and such evidence is admissible.

JOINT TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE (TIP):

In Sheikh Sintha Madhar alias Jaffar alias Sintha v. State , it was held that
there is no invariable rule that that the two accused persons cannot be made part of
the same test identification parade. Joint Test Identification Parade does in no
manner affects the validity of Test Identification Parade.
The purpose of holding a TIP is just to ensure that whether the investigation is
going on the right track or not and is merely a corroborative evidence. If the
accused is already known to the witness, Test Identification Parade does not hold
much value and it is the identification in the court which is of utmost importance.

EXCEPTION FOR TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE

Supreme Court in the case of State of H.P. v. Prem Chand held that Test
Identification Parade is not necessary when the witness already knew the accused
and identify the accused in the court of law.
This judgment was again upheld by the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar
v. State of Punjab where it again clarifies that the Test Identification Parade is not
necessary when the witness already knew the accused.
Supreme Court in the case of State of A.P. v. v.K. Venkata Reddy held that the
testimony of a witness in the court of law is the substantive testimony and
identification of an accused in the Test Identification Parade is only the
confirmatory of the testimony made before the court.

11
Supreme Court in the case of Dana Yadav V. State of Bihar upheld its decision
and again made it clear that the sole purpose of TIP is to lend corroboration to the
court identification of the accused.
LANDMARK JUDGEMENT

Supreme Court in the case of Hare Kishan Singh V. State of Bihar 1 held that the
Court identification of the accused by the witness is useless when the witness has
already failed to identify the accused at the Test Identification Parade.
Supreme Court in the case of Kishore Prabhakar Sawant V. State of
Maharashtra 2 held that if the accused is caught red-handed from the Crime
Scene, then no question of Test Identification Parade arises..
Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Pal Singh V. State of Haryana3 held that the
accused can’t be compelled to line up for Test Identification Parade and if the
accused refuses to submit himself for Test Identification Parade, he does so at his
own risk.
Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra V. Suresh4 said that the Test
Identification Parade is done for the benefit of the investigation they are not
primarily held for the court.
Raman Bhai Narayan Bhai Patel v. AIR, Gujarat (1999) SCC6 5case, the attack
took place in broad daylight, and the courts ruled that if the crime was committed
in broad daylight, the witnesses would easily remember and identify the person.
Said to be identifiable. A conviction was committed based on identification by the
Test Identification Parade.
Kedar Singh Vs. State Of Bihar
In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that because there is never complete
darkness, individuals could be identified even at night in complete darkness. There
may be other ways to identify individuals. For example, body type, clothing, gait,
voice, etc.

1
HARE KISHAN SINGH V. STATE OF BIHAR, AIR 1988 SC 863.
2
KISHORE PRABHAKAR SAWANT V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, (1999) 2 SCC 45.
3
SURAJ PAL V. STATE OF HARYANA, (1995) 2 SCC 64.
4
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v.SURESH, (2000) 1 SCC 471.
5
RAMAN BHAI NARAYAN BHAI PATEL v. AIR, GUJARAT (1999) SCC6

12
 CONCLUSION

Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act “allows the identification of the accused as well
as the proofs admissible in the courtroom though there is the absence of
compulsory process of sending the suspected for identification parade, in order to
facilitate such process. Section 54-A of Code of Criminal Procedure lays down the
process to send the suspected for test identification parade.”
Section 54A “allows the person suspected to be sent for test identification parade
when the appropriate court has the right to send the person to be a subject of test
identification parade by directing the person itself or the police officer to take the
procedure required.”
High Courts and even the Supreme Court has held time and again that the test
identification parade does not form a substantive piece of evidence in the eyes of
law. Moreover, it is important to note that failure to hold an identification parade
does not make the identification in front of the court as inadmissible..
What forms part of a substantial piece of evidence is the identification of the
accused persons before the court by a witness and that prior identification or un-
identification during a test identification parade is immaterial as long as the
witness identifies the accused before the trial Court. The test identification parade
only forms a corroborative piece of evidence in the eyes of law.
Identification of the accused made in court, is substantive evidence, whereas
identification of the accused in test identification parade is though a primary
evidence but not substantive and the same can be used only to corroborate the
identification of accused by the witness in court.

13
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books
The Evidence Act ,1872 Bareact

Websites
www.lawbug.com
www.studocu.com
www.juscorpus.com
www.studyiq.com

14