Parade not required if accused is known: SC

Parade not required if accused is known: SC

The Supreme Court has ruled that test identification parade (TIP) is not required if the accused is known to the victim or the witness in a criminal case.

Hence, such an offender cannot challenge his conviction on the ground that he was not made to undergo TIP by the investigating agency, the apex court added. A bench of justices
A K Patnaik and Swatanter Kumar made the significant ruling while convicting Amit, a resident of Meerut in UP, for raping and murdering a three-year-old child.

The bench rejected Amit’s contention that he was not made to undergo the TIP before the victim’s grandmother, who had accused him of taking away the child on the pretext of offering her biscuits on March 19, 2005.

“Test Identification Parade would have been necessary if the appellant (Amit) was unknown to prosecution witness-3 (grandmother) but as the appellant was the neighbour and known to her no Test Identification Parade was necessary for her to identify the appellant,” the court said.

Investigating agencies opt for TIP to collect substantial evidence against the offender, in a case where the victim is not previously known to the accused.

In the proceeding, the accused are brought before the victim in the presence of a metropolitan/judicial magistrate, who conducts and records the proceedings. 

Moreover, the suspects can refuse to undergo the TIP. In case of refusal, the reasons are noted down but it may go against the accused if reasons are not plausible enough.

Reinstate ‘short’ constable: Court

New Delhi: Nearly 15 years after he was sacked for not meeting the height criteria by a meagre one centimetre, the Supreme Court has directed reinstatement of a police constable after it was found that the termination was based on wrong assessment. The apex court passed the order while upholding an appeal by Md Masaud Alam challenging a judgement of the Patna High Court which quashed a single judge’s order, directing his reinstatement.

Alam, along with several others, was sacked in March 1997 for failing to meet the height requirement of 165 cm under the Police Order No 202 of 1988 of Bihar government.