Test Identification Parade Reliability in Criminal Cases

Source: Supreme Court

Why in News? 

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta in the case of Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi (2025) acquitted a man accused of murdering an elderly man during a robbery, holding that the Test Identification Parade was invalid and the eyewitness identification was unreliable.

What was the Background of Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi (2025) Case? 

• The appellant was accused of murdering an elderly man during a robbery. 
• The prosecution's case relied primarily on a sole eyewitness who claimed to have witnessed the incident. 
• A Test Identification Parade (TIP) was conducted to identify the accused. 
• The eyewitness identified the accused in court nearly eight years after the incident through video conferencing. 
• The accused had been in jail for approximately 15 years at the time of the Supreme Court judgment. 
• The prosecution claimed that efforts to conduct the TIP failed due to the accused's refusal to participate. 
• The accused's photographs had allegedly been shown to the eyewitness before the TIP was conducted. 
• There were substantial improvements and material contradictions in the eyewitness's testimony over time.

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court held that identification of the accused in court after nearly eight and a half years was extremely unlikely to be reliable, especially since the eyewitness (Smt. Indra Prabha Gulati, PW-18) admitted her distance vision was weak, she was 73 years old at the time of incident, and was not wearing spectacles during video conferencing deposition. 
• The Court declared the Test Identification Parade invalid, noting that the accused's photographs were already shown to the eyewitness before the TIP, emphasizing that "where the witnesses have had an opportunity to see the accused prior to the holding of the TIP, the evidentiary worth of such proceedings stands considerably diminished." 
• The bench held that it is the prosecution's duty to establish beyond doubt that the accused was kept baparda (veiled) from arrest until TIP to rule out any possibility of the witness seeing the accused's face beforehand, whether physically or through photographs. 
• The Court held: "Once her identification of the accused-appellant in Court is discarded, no substantive evidence remains on record to connect the accused with the crime." 
• Noting that the entire chain of circumstances remained unlinked, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and ordered the release of the appellant-accused, who had been in jail for about 15 years. 

What is the Test Identification Parade (TIP)? 

About:  

• One of the methods of establishing the identity of the accused is TIP which is received under Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA). 
• This Section is now covered under Section 7 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA).  
• This Section deals with the facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts. 

Purpose:  

• The idea of the parade is to test the veracity of the witness on the question of his capability to identify from among several people an unknown person whom the witness had seen in the context of an offence. 
• It has two major purposes:  
  • To satisfy the investigating authorities, that a certain person not previously known to the witnesses was involved in the commission of the crime.  
  • To furnish evidence to corroborate the testimony which the witness concerned tenders before the Court. 

Essential Elements:  

• Identification parades shall be conducted by a Judicial Magistrate at the Jail as far as possible.   
• Statements made by the identifying witness during the identification parade should be recorded in the proceedings. Even if a witness makes a mistake, it should be recorded. 
• TIP is not a substantive piece of evidence in law and can only be used for corroborating or contradicting evidence of witness concerned as given in the Court.   

Mode of TIP: 

• Identification parades shall be conducted by a Judicial Magistrate at the Jail as far as possible.  
• While making arrangements for the parade, the Police Officers should completely efface themselves, leaving it to the Magistrate to conduct the actual identification proceedings. 
• When a witness says that he can identify the accused persons or others connected with the case under investigation, the Investigating Officer shall record in the case diary their description in detail, noting the following points:  
  • Their descriptions  
  • The extent of prevailing light at the time of the offence (daylight, moonlight, flashing of torches, burning kerosene, electric or gas lights). 
  • Details of opportunities of seeing the accused at the time of the offence and anything outstanding in the features or conduct of the accused which impressed him (identifier).  
  • The distance from which he saw the accused.  
  • The extent of time during which he saw the accused. 
• When a parade has to be held for the identification of a person or person by a witness such person or persons shall be carefully kept out of the view of the witnesses and mingled with a considerable number of other people of a like class. 
• The Magistrate or other persons conducting the parade should satisfy himself or themselves that no Police Officer takes part in the actual identification proceedings. 
• Statements made by the identifying witness during the identification parade should be recorded in the proceedings. Even if a witness makes a mistake, it should be recorded. 
• After the completion of the identification parade and the drawing up of the proceedings, a certificate must be issued which is signed by the Magistrate who conducted the Parade.  

Evidentiary Value of TIP: 

• TIP is not a substantive piece of evidence in law and can only be used for corroborating or contradicting evidence of witness concerned as given in the Court.

Case Law: 

• In Ramkishan v. State of Bombay (1955), the Supreme Court held during investigation, the police are required to conduct identification parades. These parades serve the purpose of enabling witnesses to identify either the properties that are the focus of the offence or the individuals involved in the crime.