The investigating agency retains the right to conduct Test Identification Parades (TIPs), which are relevant for evidence evaluation, unless proven otherwise illegal.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 25281/2022 (exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL. M. C. NO. 6494/2022

1. The present petition has been filed for the following prayers:

"Quash and/or modify the impugned orders dated 13.09.2022, 30.09.2022 and 21.11.2022 passed by Ld. ACMM-01 (Central), Ld. MM Mahila Court-04, Central and MM-06 (C) respectively and order dated 26.11.2022 passed by Ld. ASJ (02) Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in FIR no. 402/22 under Sections 92/394/506/34 IPC, PS Paharganj"

2. Learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that initially a case FIR No. 402/2022 was registered under Sections 392/394/506/34 IPC PS Paharganj.

3. It has been submitted that briefly the allegations are that the Contractor/consigners-Jai Mata Di Logistics Pvt. Ltd. was carrying the gold, diamond and silver articles and a robbery was conducted. During the course of the investigations, recovery was effected. Pursuant to the recovery been effected an application was moved by Sh. Sunil Kumar, Proprietor of Jai Mata Di Logistics Pvt. Ltd for release of the articles. The State gave its no objections on the basis of which learned ACMM-01 vide order dated 13th September, 2022 ordered for release of the articles subject to certain conditions as contained in order dated 13th September, 2022.

4. On 30th September, 2022, the State moved an application for conducting TIP of the case property. This application was rejected by the learned MM inter alia on the ground that once the articles have been ordered to be released to the person who was in lawful custody of the articles, there is no reason whatsoever for identification of the articles. Learned MM took a view that the articles were ordered to be released upon production of original bills by the consignor. Learned MM was also of the view that the application for TIP had to be moved prior to the order of release of articles and the IO should have raised an objection at the time of reply to the superdari application, if the articles had not been identified. The application was inter alia also dismissed on the ground that it was moved at the belated stage, and may also potentially lead to an inconsistency.

5. Learned MM also inter alia held that in contract of consignment, now it is up to the jewellers/jewellery shop owners, to claim the articles back from the consignor, as the articles were allegedly stolen while being in the custody of the consignor. It was inter alia held that the TIP at this stage, would be an exercise in futility, as the same is now a matter between the consignor and the concerned jewellery shop owners.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for the State states that subsequent another application for TIP was moved which was also dismissed vide order dated 21st November, 2022.

7. The State then invoked the revisional jurisdiction and learned ASJ vide his impugned order dated 26th November, 2022 dismissed the revision petition predominantly on the ground that the recovered stolen articles are easily identifiable through the bills and the photographs which were issued by their respective owners before they were handed over to the consignor for their delivery to their respective destinations. Learned ASJ is of the view that the documents the attested copies of which have been directed to be supplied to the IO can be used for the purpose of identification of the recovered jewellery articles by comparing and matching them with the said documents.

8. The State has assailed the impugned order predominantly on the ground that in many of the bills only weight a