RAVINDRA @ RAVI BANSI GOHAR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] 3 S.C.R. 978 · Decided: 04-08-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.K. MUKHERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
RA VIND RA @ RA VI BANSI GOHAR. 
v. 
ST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. 
AUGUST 4, 1998 
[M.K. MUKHERJEE AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Murder-Po/ice Constable was the 
eye-witness, not disclosing details about the accused in his statement to the 
police as to fix-up the identity of the accused nor ascerting that person whom 
C he named in FIR was accused before the court-Police showing photographs 
of the accused to the witness before identification parade-Witnesses were 
attached to the Police Station where the accused were in lock-up for some 
time prior to incident-Held: Would not establish the probability of witnesses 
knowing accused persons--Hence Conviction on the basis of the sole 
identification of such witnesses is not sustainable. 
D 
Evidence Act, 1872-Section 9-Test-ldentification-Parade-
Legitimacy-Photographs of the accused persons shown to witnesses before 
parade-Parade held in lock-up of the investigating agency-ldentifYing 
witness were Police-Constables attached to concerned police station-Held, 
E not valid since the witnesses had sufficient opportunity to identifY the accused. 
Criminal procedure Code, 1973--Section 154-FIR on the statement 
of the Police Constable, who knew the two accused out of four-No disclosure 
of surname nor details whom he had seen-FIR still mentioning full name of 
two accused-The peculiar fact and circumstances remain unexplained-
F Held, FIR was not prepared at the time alleged by the prosecution but it 
was the outcome of the investigation. 
According to prosecution, a number of persons attacked on a police 
station and hurled country-made bombs. In the process a number of police 
G constables sustained injuries. Four of them, who were carrying firearms, 
thereafter entered into the Lock-up from the front entrance, where PW-2, a 
police Naik, was on duty and went to cell No. 1 where B was detained and 
killed him. PW-17, Officer-In-Charge of the police station recorded the 
statement of PW-2, wherein PW-2, besides detailing the incident stated that 
he could identify Vand K as two of the miscreants. PW-17, on the statement 
H PW-2, registered a case and took up investigation. 
978 
,. 
RAVINDRA @RAVI BANS Iv. STA TE OF MAHARASHTRA 
979 
In the course of investigation three of the accused persons including A 
the two appellants were placed on Test Identification (TD parades, which were 
held by, PW-18, Special Executive Magistrate. PW-2, identified both the 
appellants and an accused Rand PW-12, identified one of the appellants. 
The appellants pleaded that while they were in the lock-up earlier their 
photographs were taken which were later shown to PWs 2 & 12 to enable B 
them to implicate the appellants in the case. The trial ended in conviction of 
each of the appellants for those offences and sentence of death, imprisonment 
for different terms, including life, and fine. High Court in appeal affirmed the 
convictions and sentence of the appellants. Hence this appeal. 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the conviction and sentence of the C 
appellants, this Court. 
HELD : 1. The identification parades belong to the investigation stage 
and they serve to provide the investigating authority with materials to assure 
themselves if the investigation is proceeding on the right lines. It is through 
these identification parades that the investigating agencies is required to 
ascertain whether the person whom they suspect to have committed offence 
were the real culprits-and not by showing the suspects or their photographs. 
Such being the purpose of identification parades, the investigating agency, by 
showing the photographs of the suspects whom they intended to place in the 
D 
TI 11arade, made it farcical. If really the investigating agency was satisfied E 
that the witnesses did know that the appellants from before and they were 
in fact amongst the miscreants, the question of holding the TI parade in 
respect of them for their identification could not have arisen. [985-C-D] 
1.2. In the present case not only the photographs of the appellants and 
other accused were shown before the TI parade, but they were held in the F 
lock-up of the investigating agency thereby giving sufficient opportunity to 
the identifying witnesses of seeing the persons to be identified. Having 
regard to the facts that the two identifying witnesses were police constables 
attached to the police station concerned, it was all the more necessary for 
the investigati

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