BOLLAVARAM PEDDA NARSI REDDY AND ORS. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 723 · Decided: 07-05-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

,.L 
.>: 
• 
.... 
" 
BOLLAVARAM PEDDA NARSI REDDY AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
MAY .7, 1991 
[KULDIP SINGH AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] 
Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) 
Act, 1970: Section 2. 
Indian Penal Code 1860: Sections 302 and 149. 
Criminal Law-Murder-Identification of accused-Circums-
tances showing that eye-witnesses did not have the opportunity to 
identify the accused-Rejection of testimony of witnesses and acquittal 
by trial court-Appeal against acquittal by the State-Power of appel-
late court to reappraise and evaluate evidence-Reversal of acquittal 
order and conviction of accused by appellate court held not justified. 
Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 9 . 
Test Identification Parades-Mixing of persons known to accused 
with witnesses-Effect of. 
The appellants (A-1 to A-3 and A-5-6), along witb,Co-accused 
(A-4), were prosecuted under sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal 
Code. Test identification parades were conducted by the Magistrates in 
which A-6 was identified by PWs 1, 2, 3 and 4 and A-1, 2, 3, and 5 were 
identified by PWs 1 and 2. The trial court held that the identification 
parade was perfunctory and was of no assistance to the prosecution. It 
also rejected the testimony of PWs 1 to 5 by holding that the evidence of 
PWs 3, 4, and 5 was untrust-wortby and that it was unsafe to accept the 
testimony of other two eye-witnesses, PWs 1 and 2 for recording a 
conviction. Accordingly the trial court acquitted all the accused 
persons. Against the order of acquittal, the State preferred an appeal 
before the High Court. The High Court accepted the testimony of PWs 
1 and 2, corroborated by the evidence of test identification parade and 
the testimony of PW s 3 and 4 to fmd the appellants guilty. Accordingly 
the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the appel-
lants. Since A-4 was not identified by the PWs 1 to 4, be was given the 
benefit of doubt and the High Court confirmed bis acquittal. 
723 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
724 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
I 1991] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
In appeal to this court under section 2 of the Supreme Court 
(Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, it was con-
tended on behalf of the appellants that PWs (I and 2) were strangers to 
the assailants and in the circumstances of the case they did not have the 
.,, 
opportunity to identify the assaillants and consequently their testimony 
was not free from doubt; the trial court was right in rejeeting the 
B testimony of these witnesses but the High Court erred in reversing the 
order of acquittal and convicting the appellants by accepting the 
testimony of these witnesses. 
c 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of conviction and 
J. 
sentence, this Court, 
HELD: I. It is open to Supreme Court to re-examine the evidence 
for the purpose of satisfying itself whether the High Court was justified 
in reversing the order of acquittal in the facts and circumstances of the 
case. In an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court is empowered 
to evaluate the evidence and arrive at its own conclusion. But where 
D 
the view taken by the trial court on an appreciation of the evidence 
is also a plausible view, the Appellate Court shall be slow to inter-
fere with it even when a different view is possible on a reappraisal 
of the evidence. [728F-G) 
I. I Even when two evenly balanced views of the evidence are 
E 
possible one must necessarily concede the existence of a reasonable 
doubt. [73IF) 
2. The evidence given by the witnesses before the Court is the 
substantive evidence. In a case where the witness is a stranger to the 
accused and he identifies the accused person before the court for the 
F • first time, the court will not ordinarily accept that identification as 
conclusive. It is to lend assurance to the testimony of the witnesses that 
evidence in the form of an earlier identification is tendered. If the 
accused persons are got identified by the witness soon after their arrest 
and such identification does not suffer from any infirmity that circums-
tance lends corroboration to the evidence given by the witness before 
G 
the Court. But in a case where the evidence before the court is itself 
shaky, the identification before the magistrate would be of no assistance 
to the prosecution. [7290-E) 
2. I The credibility of the evidence relating to the identification 
depends largely on the opportunity the witness had to observe the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.