Victim’s Inability to Identify Accused - Several sources highlight that victims or witnesses often fail to identify accused individuals due to the passage of time, lack of proper identification procedures, or the accused being strangers. For instance, ["2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 824"] notes that the witness did not approach the jeep, see how many fled, or identify anyone in the mob, and later admitted that due to passage of time ["she"] was not in a position to identify the accused in the identification parade. Similarly, ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 1413"] states that there are no specific overt-acts as against the petitioners and emphasizes that since video of entire incident is available, there is no reason, why the other assailants could not be identified till today. Several sources also mention the absence of test identification parades, which hampers proper identification ["2022 0 Supreme(Gau) 941"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3013"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3059"].**
Role of Evidence and Identification Procedures - The lack of proper identification procedures, such as test identification parades, is a recurring concern. For example, ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3013"] and ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3059"] explicitly state that no test identification parade was conducted, and witnesses could not name or specifically identify the accused, often due to the time elapsed or the accused being strangers. ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52215"] notes that except evidence of PW.1, there is no other evidence to identify the accused, and no material to show that the petitioners have damaged any property. The reliance solely on the witnesses’ inability to identify accused without corroborative procedures weakens the case against the accused ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 645"].**
Circumstances of Mob Gatherings - Many incidents involved mobs gathering for protests or submissions at government offices, not with the intent to commit offenses, and often without armed weapons. ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3013"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(AP) 4407"], and ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 8845"] describe mobs that gathered for submitting their representations and were not armed with weapons. These sources emphasize that the mobs' actions, such as shouting or damaging property, were not necessarily criminal or with malicious intent, and that no evidence shows the accused actively participated in violence or property damage. This undermines the basis for linking accused individuals to specific criminal acts solely based on mob participation ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 1413"].**
Challenges in Linking Accused to Crime - Several sources highlight the difficulties in establishing individual guilt due to lack of identification, absence of witnesses naming specific accused, and no forensic evidence linking accused to the crimes. ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 8845"] states that the victim saw the faces of the accused and it was not so dark as if she could not see the faces, but later admits that it was not possible at all when the victim was in allegedly unconscious at the time of occurrence. ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 37542"] mentions that none of the witnesses identified any of the accused and that no test identification parade was conducted, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The absence of concrete evidence and proper identification procedures leads to questions about the guilt of the accused ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1820"].**
Analysis and ConclusionOverall, the provided sources consistently indicate that victims and witnesses often cannot identify accused individuals due to the passage of time, lack of proper identification procedures, or the accused being strangers. The absence of test identification parades, corroborative forensic evidence, and specific witness testimony weakens the case against many accused persons. Many incidents involved mobs with no weapons, and the evidence suggests that their actions may not have been criminally targeted at specific individuals but rather collective protests or disturbances. Courts have expressed skepticism about the reliability of identification based solely on eyewitness testimony without procedural safeguards, emphasizing that mere presence in a mob does not establish individual guilt. Therefore, in cases where victims cannot identify accused persons, and proper identification procedures are lacking, the case against the accused is tenuous and warrants cautious scrutiny or possible quashing.
