The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for corroborative evidence and the need for a test identification parade in cases involving identification of the accused. The unreliability of identification in court and the retracted confession influenced the court's decision.

( 1 ) THESE two appeals are by two persons, Provash Kumar Bose and Azizur Rahman who were tried together by a Presidency Mag. of Calcutta. Provash Kumar Bose was convicted under Section 384, I. P. Code and Azizur Rahman under Sections 384-199, I. P. C. Both were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 201 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another three months.

( 2 ) THE prosecution case was that in the early hours of the morning of 21-12-1947 these two accused came to the bakery belonging to Daud Rahman at No. 9, Nawab Abdul Latif Street and when the door was opened, entered the bakery saying that they were men from the Civil Supplies Dept. Azizur Rahman, it is said, weighed one loaf of bread and said that it was under-weight and when, on his demand, Daud Rahman was called, the applt. Azizur Rahman told Daud Rahman that he would have to go to the thana as the loaves of bread in his bakery were under-weight and it is said that the applt. Provash caught hold of his hand and threatened him with a revolver while Azizur Rahman whispered something to Daud Rahman's son Gani who was also there. Thereafter Gani opened the box and brought out Rs. 250 in notes. Azizur took the money away. Both the accused, it is said, then left these premises and went to Md. Yakub's confectionary which was almost next door. There it is said, Provash told Yakub that there was a complaint against him and that he would have to go to the thana, but that if he paid some money he would not have to go. On this Yakub paid Rs. 100 and the two left.

( 3 ) INFORMATION was lodged at the thana at about 3-30 P. m. on that day. Provash it appears, was arrested on December 23, at about 11-30 A. M. while Azizur was arrested on the following day at about 4-45 p. M. There was a test identification parade on 23-12-1947 in which two witnesses, Md. Yakub and Daud Rahman were brought to identify the suspect. Azizur Rahman was not placed on any test identification parade. It appears that after he was produced before a Mag. on December 24 he made a statement which was recorded by the Mag. as a confession.

( 4 ) BOTH the accused pleaded not guilty.

( 5 ) THAT there was an occurrence as mentioned above at Daud Rahman's bakery in the early hours of the morning of 21-12-1947 is the evidence given in Ct. by three witnesses--Daud Rahman himself, his son Md. Gani and his officer Sadan. Corroborative evidence has been given by one Jawhar Ali, Asst. Secretary of the Calcutta Bakers' Assocn. who has said that Daud Rahman told him that an officer from the Enforcement Dept. had come to his shop, weighed loaves, had asked for money and had taken money. As regards the occurrence in Md. Yakub's confectionary the only eye-witness is Md. Yakub himself and he has given an account as mentioned above. Daud Rahman has given corroborative evidence by saying that Md. Yakub informed him of the occurrence at his shop immediately after the culprits left. Jawhar Ali, whom I have mentioned above, has said that on being told that the two men had just gone, he with some other people folld. them and found two persons going, one of whom was in the uniform of a police officer and with whom he had some conversation.

( 6 ) ON a consideration of this evidence I have no doubt that the occurrence as alleged did take place both in Daud Rahman's bakery and in Md. Yakub's confectionary and that of the two persona who took part in the occurrence, one committed the offence of extortion punishable under Section 384, I. P. C. and the other was guilty of abetment of that offence by adding him.

( 7 ) THAT leaves for consideration the very important question as to whether these two accused persons were the two men who took part in that occurrence. On this question of identity it is necessary to remember that admittedly none of these witnesses knew either of these accused persons from before. The fact therefore that these witnesses have identified in