The prosecution must establish the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT,J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 15. 7. 2006 affirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant, for commission of offences under Sections 356/411 ipc, and directing him to undergo R. I. for six months and pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- (under Section 411 IPC) and R. I. for three months under Section 356 ipc. The court had also directed the sentences to run concurrently.

( 2 ) THE prosecution version was that on 30. 5. 2000, the complainant Sunita kapoor while returning from school on foot was accosted by a scooterist with pillion rider; the registration number of the Scooter was 2386. It was alleged that the pillion rider snatched her gold chain and the culprits fled from the spot. The prosecution version was further that the complainant raised an alarm; the police reached there within half an hour. It was alleged that the complainant identified Narender Kumar, the pillion rider as the person who had snatched the chain; she also identified the chain. The prosecution relied mainly on the testimony of the complainant (PW-1), a public witness Vinod Joshi (PW-2) and Anil Pathak (PW-7), a Constable. On the basis of evidence led and the material produced the trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner. His appeal was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge.

( 3 ) MS. Priyanka Aggarwal, learned counsel submitted that the identity of the petitioner was not established. She relied upon the testimony of PW-1. It was contended that the complainant/witness at one stage in her examination-in-chief stated that she had identified the accused who had snatched the chain but subsequently in the course of the cross-examination deposed that the accused were not shown to her and that she was also unable to see the face of the driver as he was wearing a helmet. It was further contended that lone public witness Vinod Joshi candidly mentioned that he was unable to identify the accused/petitioner.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel contended that on the face of such a major contradiction, the trial court could not have convicted the petitioner as the prosecution had not established its allegations beyond reasonable doubts. She relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Balraj singh @ Chhajju, (1978) 3 SCC 129 to say that benefit of doubt ought to be given where the identity of the accused is suspect.

( 5 ) MR. Malik, learned counsel for the respondent resisted the petition and submitted that the order of the trial court as well as the appellate court do not call for any interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. He submitted that the contradictions pointed out were not major, that they were natural and occurred due to lapse of time. It was contended that one of the accused was chased and arrested near the site of the occurrence, the chain was recovered from him; as a result of his disclosure statement, the petitioner was arrested. These circumstances coupled with the testimony of the complainant and the public witness give a complete picture pointing to the guilt of the petitioner.

( 6 ) THE Appellate Court which was approached by the present petitioner in its judgment had inter alia recorded as follows:

"10. Anil Pathak, constable, and Anikesh Kumar, Constable present that they were on patrolling duty on a motorcycle on 30. 5. 2000. When they reached near Hargobind Enclave, they say two boys running after snatching a gold chain of one lady. They were chased and one of them was apprehended near DESU Office, karkardooma Courts, Delhi. The person, who was apprehended, was Vikram. Therefore, facts testified by these two police officials substantiate the testimony of Vinod Joshi and Smt. Sunita Kapoor. It is evident that the appellant was running on his two wheeler along with Narender Kumar, after snatching chain from the neck of the complainant. Testimony of Vinod Joshi, anikesh Kumar, constable and Anil Pathak, Constabl