RAMANATHAN versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Citation: [1978] 3 S.C.R. 694 · Decided: 18-04-1978 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
'B 
694 
RAMAN ATHAN 
v. 
STATE OF TAMIL NADU 
April 18, 1978 
[S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND P. N. SHJNGHAL, JJ.J 
Identification parade. object of-Prosecution leading no evidence to prove 
that the accused was kept "ba parda", whether an infirmity in favour of the 
accused-Identification of Prisoners Act (Act XXXlll) of 1920. 
Ev!dence Act! (A~t I~, 1812-Section 45-0pinion of experts, rel1vancy 
of-Pue Arms rdentzficat1on, use of photographs through comprised 1nicro-
scope. 
The appellant was convicted of otfences under Sections 302 (on two rounts), 
307 and 460 I.P.C., and sentenced to death by the trial court, for illegally 
entering a residential house and causing two murders by shooting. 
He was 
noticed by the deceased Natrajan's wife and neighbour, who identified him in a 
.. ..._ 
test-parade. 
'fb.e High Court confirmed the death sentence. 
The appellant, 
_, -'ii 
inter-alia, challenged the propriety of his identification by the witnesses, and 
also the identification of the fire-arm used for the murders. 
D 
Dismissing tb.e appeal, the Court. 
E 
F 
H 
HELD' : 1. Identifica.tion parades have been in common use for a very long 
time, for the obiect of placing a suspect in a line up with other persons for 
identification is to find out whether he is the perpetrator of the crime. 
This 
is all the more necessary where the name of the offender is not mentioned by 
those who claim to be eye witnesses of the incident but they claim that although 
they did not kriow him earlier, they could recall his features in sufficient details 
and Would be able to identify him if and when they happened to see him. 
The holding of a test identification in such cases is as. much in the interest of 
the investigating agency or the prosecution as in the interest of the suspect or 
the accused. 
For while it enables the investigating officer to ascertain the 
correctness or otherwise of the claim of those witnesses who claim to have 
seen the perpetrator of the crime, and their capacity to identify him, and thereby 
fill the gap in the investigation regarding the identity of the culprit, it saves 
the suspeCt or the accused from the sudden risk of being identified in the dock 
by the self same witnesses during the cO"Urse of the trial. The line up of the 
suspect in a test identification parade isi therefore a workable way of testing 
the memory and veracity of witnesses in such cases and has worked well in 
actual practice. [703 A-DJ 
(2) The argument that the evidence regarding the holding of a test identifi-
cation parade would be of no consequence and would suffer from a fatal defect 
if the prosecution has not led any evidence to prove that the appellant was 
kept "ba parda'', is not correct. After referring to the decision in Dhokal Sint?h 
and Anr. v. The State, I.LR. (1953) 3 Raj. 762, their Lordships approved of 
the view taken in State of Raiasthan v. Raniitha, A.I.R. 1962, Raj 78 (FB) in 
which the earlier decision in Dhokal Singh's case wa<> adequately re·examined. 
[701 H, 702, 703A] 
(3) A comparison microscope is the most important and most-widely used 
scientific instrument in comparing the crime cartridge with the test cartridge, 
but there has been considerable difference of opinion amongst investigators 
regarding these photographs in a court for the purpose of illustrating the match-
ing of the markings, and while it may be that microscopic photographs, when 
taken with the due care and in the best of conditions, may enable the evidence 
to be placed on the record in a visible form, a court would not be justified in 
rejecting the opinion of an expert who bas examined the markings under the 
comparison microscOpe simn1y for the reason that he has not thought it neces-
sary to take the photographs. [705 F-706 A-BJ 
' 
.. 
• 
I ·>r-
• 
-
-
• 
• 
RAMANATHAN v. TAMIL NADU STATE (Shinghal, !.) 
695 
The State of Gujarat v. Adani Fateh Moluned Un1aliva & Ors., [1971] 3 
A 
SCR 208, differentiated. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 483 of 
1976. 
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 
19th February 1976 of the Madras High Court in Cr!. A. No. 669/75 
and Reference Trial No. 46 of l\!'7~. 
B 
Frank Anthony, S. C. Agarwal, P. Ramachandran, Aruneshwar 
Gupta and Sushi/ Kumar for the Appellant. 
A. P. Rangam for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SHINGHAL, J. 
This appeal by special leave is directed against the c 
judgment of the Madras High Court dat

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