The reliability of identification evidence and the importance of conducting the test identification parade promptly and without unauthorized presence are crucial in criminal cases.

1. Since all the aforesaid mentioned appeals arise out of judgment and order dated 20.2.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Surajpur, District Sarguja in Sessions Trial No. 229/200 I convicting the accused/appellants under Section 395/397 IPC and sentencing each of them to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay fine of Rs. 200, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 days, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 30.1.2001 at about 5.40 p.m. FIR Ex. P-10 was lodged by Raj Roop Jain (PW-11) to the effect that on that day at about 5.10 p.m. when he was returning to Ambikapur from Vishrampur on his scooter with Rs. 45,365 which was kept in the rear dickey and Rs. 70,000 kept in front dickey of the scooter and as soon as he reached near Kumda turning, two scooter-borne persons, one of them carrying pistol in his hand, overtook him and asked him to stop the scooter. It is alleged that sensing trouble, the complainant accelerated the scooter in order to save him but as he had lost control over the scooter, he fell down. It is further alleged' that when he raised cries for help, four persons of the nearby locality came there, who, as discovered later, were none else but the accomplices of the persons who had overtaken the complainant and asked him to stop. Thereafter, it is alleged that the accused persons asked him to leave the scooter and get away. The accused persons are alleged to have been armed with sword,' knife, club and pistol. Subsequently, it is alleged that all the accused persons fled away on two scooters including that of the complainant. The complainant has given description of the accused persons stating that they were quite young men in the age group of 25-26 years, one was wheatish complexioned, one darkish complexioned wearing jerkin. The complainant also claimed to recognize the culprits if he got an opportunity to see them. On the basis of this FIR, offence under Section 395 IPC was registered against the accused persons at police station Jai Nagar. It is further alleged that accused Sanjay, Dharmendra, Asif Ahmad and Mohd. Samim were arrested on 10.2.2001 whereas accused Shilabh Raj was arrested on 19.2.2001. Based on memorandum Ex. P-15, seizure of cash amounting to Rs. 7,600, Scooter No. MP 27 0/83 I 6, knife, pant and shirt was made from accused Sanjay vide seizure memo Ex. P-20. Based on memorandum Ex. P-14 seizure of club, pant and shirt was made from accused Dharmendra vide seizure memo Ex. P-2 I and cash amounting to Rs. 3000 was seized from him vide seizure memo Ex. P-22. Based on memorandum Ex. P16 seizure of cash amounting to Rs. 5,700, revolver, pant, shirt and muffler was made from accused Asif Ahmad vide seizure memo Ex. P-2. Based on memorandum Ex. P-17 seizure of TV, cash amounting to Rs. 4,000 and a club was made from accused Mohd. Samim vide seizure memo Ex. P-24, P-25 and P-26. Based on memorandum Ex. P-19 seizure of cash amounting to Rs. 4,200, attache, pant, shirt, shawl and sweater was made from accused Shilabh Raj vide seizure memo Ex. P-29. Test Identification Parade was conducted on 5.4.2001 by R.B. Oewangan (PW-13). After completion of investigation, challan was filed by the police on 22.4.200 I 'for the offences under Sections 395, 397 IPC and 25/27 of the Arms Act. As one of the accused namely Sarafraj was minor, his case was made over to the Juvenile Court.

3. So as to hold the accused persons guilty, prosecution has examined 21 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case. This apart, one Laxmi Narayan Giri-(DW-I) has also been examined by the defence in support of its case.

4. After hearing the parties, the trial Court has acquitted the accused/appellan