Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RATNAKER BHENGRA, J.
Suresh Rajwar @ Suresh Pd. Rajwar, S/o Rajendra Pd. Rajwar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 335 of 2010
Decided on : 26-11-2021
Identification - Criminal Assault - IPC 147,149,341,323,353 - The judgment discusses the improper identification of the accused, the absence of a Test Identification Parade (TIP), and the lack of examination of the Investigating Officer and Doctor. The court concludes that the charges against the appellants are not proved beyond reasonable doubt, leading to their acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves an incident where the appellants were convicted for offences under sections 147,149,341,323, and 353 of the IPC based on the prosecution's case of criminal assault and damage to property. The prosecution's case was primarily supported by the evidence of the informant and other witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the identification of the appellants by the informant and other witnesses was improper, as it was done for the first time in court without a Test Identification Parade (TIP). The non-examination of the Investigating Officer and Doctor, along with the absence of proper witness competence, raised doubts about the prosecution's case. As a result, the court acquitted the appellants of all charges.
Issues: Improper identification, absence of Test Identification Parade, lack of examination of key witnesses, and witness competence.
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment emphasizes the importance of proper identification procedures, such as conducting a Test Identification Parade, and the need for examination of key witnesses to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, acquitting the appellants and discharging them from the liability of their bail-bonds.
JUDGMENT :
RATNAKER BHENGRA, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the state.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 16.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Bokaro in Sessions Trial Case No. 148 of 2006 arising out of Pindrajora PS case No. 116 of 2004 corresponding to GR Case No. 1336 of 2004, whereby and where under, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under sections 147,149,341,323 and 353 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for each of the offences. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case is based on the fardbayan dated 23.12.2004 at 2:00 am of the informant Md. Alimuddin (PW-2), officer-in-charge of Pindrajora PS, Dist-Bokaro and recorded by ASI K.S. Horo of the same police station. The prosecution story, in brief, as per the fardbayan of the informant is that informant along with other police officials proceeded on 22.12.2004 at 5:00 p.m. for village Jaala for investigation of Pindrajora Case No. 114 of 2004 in police jeep No. BR-20E/3498. When they were returning from village Jaala to Bandhgora by Telidih-Sonabad Road, the informant received information from control room that four unknown criminals had looted one black colour Hero Honda Passion motorcycle bearing No. JH 09C-0283 from Sector-XII F and were fleeing away towards Bandhgora side riding on two motorcycles out of which one motorcycle was of black colour Hero Honda No. JH10D-7989. After moving a little distance, they saw light of three motorcycles coming and when they reached near them, they shouted to which criminals turned the motorcycle and fled towards Bandhgora and they followed the criminals. At 7:15 am, criminals reached at village Bandhgora side and dashed one tempo which was coming from the opposite side near Harila Shiv Mandir due to which they fell down from the motorcycle. Criminals left the motorcycle and started fleeing away but police chased them and caught one of the criminals but others escaped taking advantage of night. Informant further stated that two of the tempo passengers were also injured. In the meantime hundred of villagers assembled there and they assaulted the informant and constable Binod Kumar Singh. Thereafter other police officials came there and saved their life and the villagers fled away. Villagers also damaged their jeep bearing BR-20E/3498 and also assaulted the criminals which police had caught and anyhow saved his life from the villagers. The apprehended criminal disclosed his name as Babloo Dutta ,resident of old market, Chass, P.S. Chass, District-Bokaro. The criminal accepted that some time ago, he with his other associates had looted a black coloured Hero Honda Motorcycle no. JH09C-0283 from sector XII F. Informant further stated that they recovered two motorcycles bearing no. JH10D-7989 and JH09C-0283 used in commission of crime and left by the criminals and four live cartridges of .315 bore and one Nokia mobile from the apprehended criminal for which the informant himself had filled a written report separately for the registration of FIR. Informant further stated that he and police no. 265 Binod Kumar Singh were undergoing treatment at BGH, B.S. City. Passengers of tempo Kurban and Naushad, resident of Narayanpur were injured and the apprehended criminals Babloo Dutta was also sent for treatment of his injury. informant further stated that hundred of villagers by forming an unlawful assembly, assaulted him, constable Binod Kumar Singh and the apprehended criminal with intention to kill them, damaged the Government Jeep and obstructed the Government work.
4. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant Pindrajora PS case No. 116 of 2004 dated 23.12.2004 was registered under sections 147, 148, 149, 341,323,307, 353 and 427 IPC against unknown hundreds of villagers of Bandhgora. On completion
AI
Proper identification procedures, such as Test Identification Parade, and the examination of key witnesses are essential to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Failure of prosecution to prove charge beyond reasonable doubt due to inordinate delay in FIR and weak identification evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the unreliability of witness identification and the importance of a fair and proper Test Identification Parade (TIP) in corroborating witness testi....
Eyewitness testimony, even from an interested witness, can sustain a conviction if corroborated by credible evidence and circumstances.
The court acquitted the appellants due to doubts in identification and failure to recover stolen property, emphasizing the prosecution's burden of proof.
Dock identification of unknown accused by witnesses without prior test identification parade is unreliable for conviction, especially with witness contradictions and evidentiary doubts.
The prosecution must establish the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt; weak witness identification leads to acquittal.
The court clarified that identification procedures must meet strict standards to ensure reliability; failure to do so results in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
