2018 P Cr. L J Note 201
MISBAH-UL-HASSAN and another—Appellants
The STATE and others—Respondents
Identification parade— Record showed that the identification test was conducted thirteen days after the arrest of accused—Prosecution had not furnished any explanation for the delay—Description of the person whom deceased met in the other city was neither given in the FIR nor in the statements of witnesses got recorded with the police—Complainant nominated the accused in the case through application on 10.7.2009, while the identification parade was held on 9.9.2009—Accused was, thus, previously known to the complainant party—Accused succeeded in proving that his face was not muffled when the police produced him before the Judicial Magistrate for judicial remand on 27.8.2009—Accused was mixed-up with eight dummies but without disclosing their addresses, occupations and the particular of the cases in which they were arrested—Said factors bereaved the test of its credibility and significance, thus prosecution had failed in its primary duty to ensure that the accused was not seen by the witnesses before the identification test—Identification test, in circumstances, was of no evidentiary value and could not be considered to maintain the conviction of the accused.