Supreme Court acquits 13 in rioting case due to lapses in Identification Parade

The Supreme Court last week acquitted over 13 persons in a case of rioting and unlawful assembly due to shortcomings in the Test Identification Parade (TIP) [Gireesan Nair vs State of Kerala]..A bench of Justices BR Gavai and PS Narasimha noted that the witnesses had the opportunity of seeing the accused before the TIP was conducted. One of the accused, at the end of the first TIP, had even raised a grievance that the suspects were all photographed, video-graphed and were shown to the witnesses."We are of the opinion that there existed no useful purpose behind conducting the TIP. The TIP was a mere formality, and no value could be attached to it. As the only evidence for convicting the appellants is the evidence of the eyewitnesses in the TIP, and when the TIP is vitiated, the conviction cannot be upheld," the bench held in its order pronounced on November 11..The bench was hearing criminal appeals challenging the decision of the Kerala High Court which had upheld their conviction and sentence of 4 years' imprisonment.They were convicted under the IPC and Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act for their 'violent' protests staged on July 12, 2000 in which they had set ablaze around 81 buses of the state resulting in death of a conductor of one of the buses. These persons were protesting the State's decision to delink pre-degree courses from colleges and start plus-two courses in schools. On the day before this incident also, there were protests by students. However, the police had resorted to 'harsh' methods to disburse the crowd leaving several students injured.The prosecution, to prove its case, had relied heavily on the testimonies of the eye witnesses, who had also identified the accused during the TIP conducted to establish the identity of the accused.However, the prosecution failed to follow the due process to conduct a TIP, especially the fact that witnesses must not get any opportunity to see the accused prior to the TIP..The Supreme Court noted that there was a delay on part of the prosecution to even conduct the TIP."Undue delay in conducting a TIP has a serious bearing on the credibility of the identification process. Though there is no fixed timeline within which the TIP must be conducted and the consequence of the delay would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case, it is imperative to hold the TIP at the earliest. The possibility of the TIP witnesses seeing the accused is sufficient to cast doubt about their credibility," the bench observed. The Court also noted from the statements of the investigating officer that he did not take any steps to ensure that the accused and the witnesses do not see each other. "It is rather surprising to note that Investigating Officer thinks that such a measure is not necessary. Thus, we are of the opinion that the conduct of the TIP, coupled with the hovering presence of the police during the conduct of the TIP vitiated the entire process. The Trial Court as well as the High Court have committed a serious error in relying on the evidence of the TIP witnesses for convicting and sentencing the appellants," the bench observed.The bench, thus opined that the conviction and sentencing of the appellants are not sustainable in view of these lapses on the part of the prosecution..Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur appeared for the Apellants.Advocate Harshad V Hameed represented the State..[Read Judgment]