Validity of test identification parade (TIP), determined. If identification in the TIP has taken place after the accused is shown to the witnesses, then not only is the evidence of TIP inadmissible, even an identification in a court during trial is meaningless (Shaikh Umar Ahmed Shaikh and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra 29). Even a TIP conducted in the presence of a police officer is inadmissible in light of Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19 3 (Chunthuram v. State of Chhattisgarh30 and Ramkishan Mithanlal Sharma v. State of Bombay31). While conducting a TIP, it is a sinequanon that the nonsuspects should be of the same agegroup and should also have similar physical features (size, weight, color, beard, scars, marks, bodily injuries etc.) to that of the suspects. Having considered the matter in detail and having noted the various discrepancies in the manner in which both the TIPs were conducted, we believe that the prosecution has not established its case beyond reasonable doubt. Apart from the TIPs, we find no other evidence put forth by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the Accused for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148 IPC and 3(2)(e) of PDPP Act r/w 149 of the IPC. The conviction is set aside.
[Gireesan Nair v. State of Kerala, (2023) 1 SCC 180]