Wednesday, November 1, 2023

Test Identification Parade

PURPOSE:

The primary aim of a test identification parade is to establish whether the suspect is indeed the person responsible for the crime.

The rationale behind organizing these identification procedures is to enable witnesses who claim to have seen the perpetrators during the incident to identify them from a lineup of other individuals independently, without any external assistance.

The main purpose of this procedure is to assess whether the witness can accurately identify the accused from a group of people. This helps establish the witness’s reliability in identifying an unknown person in relation to the context of the crime.

Law enforcement frequently employs this method to verify the witness’s credibility, especially in cases where the witness has never encountered the accused except at the crime scene.

TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE:

A Test Identification Parade, often referred to as a "TIP," is a standard procedure employed in criminal cases to identify the accused within a courtroom. In this process, witnesses hold a significant responsibility as they are tasked with identifying the accused individual from a lineup of people presented during the parade.

In the case of Ramkishan vs Bombay State [AIR 1955 SC 104], it was established that, during the investigation of a crime, the police are required to conduct identification parades. These parades serve the purpose of enabling witnesses to identify either the properties that are the focus of the offence or the individuals involved in the crime.

 

A Test Identification Parade encompasses several key dimensions:

  1. Investigative Purpose: The primary objective of a Test Identification Parade is to provide assurance to the investigating authorities. It helps establish whether a particular person, previously unknown to the witnesses, might have been involved in the commission of the crime, or if a specific property is linked to the offense.

  2. Corroboration of Witness Testimony: The parade is designed to serve as evidence that supports and corroborates the testimony given by the concerned witness in a court of law. It adds credibility to the witness's identification of the accused.

  3. Protection of the Accused: The procedure also serves the interests of the accused by helping to eliminate the possibility of false implication. It ensures a fair and transparent identification process.

The legal framework governing Test Identification Parades in India includes two main sections:

  • Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: This section allows for the admissibility of the identification of the correct accused and related properties as relevant facts in a court of law. It is essential for providing evidence in criminal cases.

  • Section 54A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 54A comes into play when an accused's participation in the Test Identification Parade is necessary. It states that if the identification of an accused by a witness is required for the investigation of an offense for which the accused has been arrested, the court with jurisdiction may direct the arrested accused to undergo identification by one or more witnesses. The court has the authority to specify the manner in which the identification should take place.

It's worth noting that when the police conduct the Test Identification Parade, they must adhere to the provisions of Sections 161 and 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C). This is because identifying through bodily gestures is considered equivalent to making statements to the police, as established in the Ramkishan case [AIR 1955 SC 104]. However, this restriction does not apply when a Magistrate oversees the Test Identification proceedings.

Test Identification Parades are deemed necessary in situations where the victim or witness had no prior knowledge of the accused before the incident. This procedure becomes crucial in assisting witnesses in identifying the perpetrator in such cases.

Conversely, Test Identification Parades are not deemed necessary when the accused is already well-known to the witnesses. In cases where witnesses are already familiar with the accused, the need for a formal identification parade may be obviated. It's important to recognize that Test Identification Parades are not universally mandatory and their requirement may vary depending on the circumstances of each case.

The evidentiary value of a Test Identification Parade is somewhat limited due to the following reasons:

(a) Courtroom Identification: The witness is required to re-identify the accused during the court proceedings. The identification made during a Test Identification Parade serves as a preliminary or pre-trial identification and must be reaffirmed during the trial.

(b) Corroboration of Testimony: The evidence obtained from a Test Identification Parade is admissible under Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act. However, its primary purpose is to corroborate the substantive evidence presented by witnesses in court regarding the identification of the accused. In other words, the Test Identification Parade primarily bolsters and strengthens the witness's testimony during the trial.

The earlier identification made by witnesses during the Test Identification Parade is not considered to be independently valuable. It is the witness's testimony and identification in the courtroom that holds substantive value.

These principles are substantiated by legal precedents, including the case of Sampat Tatyada Shinde vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 1974 SC 791) and specific guidelines provided by the Honorable Calcutta High Court in Harbal Sheikh vs State (1991 Cr.L.J. 1258(1263)). In summary, Test Identification Parades are instrumental in reinforcing the reliability of witness identification but, on their own, are not considered as substantive evidence.

For the practical steps involved in conducting Test Identification Parades, the following guidelines should be followed:

  • Verify Jurisdiction: Ensure compliance with any reciprocal arrangements or circulars issued by the Honorable District Court pertaining to the jurisdiction for conducting Test Identification Parades for the specific Police Station.

  • Issue Summons: Issue summons to the witnesses, requiring their presence at the Test Identification Parade.

  • Coordinate with Jail Authorities: Communicate with the jail authorities to make necessary arrangements for the Test Identification Parade, including securing the suspects.

  • Seek Permission: Send a request to the Honorable I ADJ (Additional District Judge) for permission to conduct the Test Identification Parade and depart from the headquarters for this purpose.

  • Sec.161 Cr.P.C Statements: Insist on obtaining Section 161 Cr.P.C statements from the investigating officer along with a requisition for the Test Identification Parade.

  • Gather Personnel: If possible, have a stenographer equipped with a typewriter and an attender to assist with the proceedings.

  • Record Statements: Record the statements of the witnesses and the suspects separately at the jail.

  • Select Participants: Choose non-suspects for the lineup as well.

  • Choose a Suitable Location: Ensure that the location provides adequate space to keep the witness who makes the identification separate from the other witnesses.

  • Remove Unnecessary Personnel: Exclude jail personnel or any additional police officers not directly involved in the proceedings.

  • Consider Distinguishing Features: If there are distinguishing features among the suspects, select non-suspects who share similar features.

  • Suspects' Choice: Inform the suspects that they can select their positions within the lineup and can change their positions or attire if they wish. Document any changes immediately in the proceedings.

  • Documentation: Have the proceedings typed at the jail itself.

  • Transmit Records to Court: Following the conclusion of the Test Identification Parade, forward the records to the relevant court for further legal processing.

Following these steps ensures that Test Identification Parades are conducted accurately and in compliance with legal procedures. Thorough documentation and adherence to established protocols are vital to maintain the integrity of the identification process within a legal context. 

Precautions for Test Identification Parades:

  1. Special Characteristics: If the person being identified looks different from others, cover those unique features and mix them with similar-looking people to avoid issues with the identification.

  2. Identifying Objects: When identifying objects or property, follow specific rules, and do it in front of a judge.

  3. Using Witness Statements: Statements from witnesses during the identification are not strong evidence by themselves. They are used to support or challenge evidence in court.

  4. No Description in Initial Report: If the initial police report doesn't describe the culprits, it can affect the reliability of the identification.

  5. Timely Identifications: It's crucial to do identifications quickly to prevent witnesses from forgetting important details.

 

Landmark Judgments on Test Identification Parade:

  1. Hare Kishan Singh v. State of Bihar: Unreliable court identification if the witness fails to identify the accused at the test identification parade.

  2. Kishore Prabhakar Sawant v. State of Maharashtra: No need for a Test Identification Parade if the accused is apprehended red-handed at the crime scene.

  3. Kiwan Prakash Pandurang Mokash v. State of Maharashtra: Adverse inference of guilt if the accused refuses to participate in a Test Identification Parade.

  4. Suraj Pal Singh v. State of Haryana: Accused cannot be compelled to participate in a Test Identification Parade.

  5. State of Maharashtra v. Suresh: Test Identification Parades are primarily for investigative benefit, not solely for court purposes.

Conclusion:

A Test Identification Parade is used to verify the accuracy of a witness's identification of a suspect in a criminal investigation. It involves presenting a group of individuals, including the accused, to the witness to determine if they can correctly identify the perpetrator. While conducted by law enforcement and guided by a magistrate, the primary goal is to corroborate the witness's court testimony, as test identification alone is not considered substantive evidence.