This article has been written by Arjun Kumar from Aligarh Muslim University Malappuram Kerala.

Introduction

Earlier there was no specific provision in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or Code of Criminal Procedure regarding Test Identification Parade. By the amendment of Cr.P.C. in 2005, a new Section 54A was inserted for the Test Identification Parade. This provision enables the police to seek permission of the court for identification of the accused and the court may determine the manner of identification includes ‘Test identification Parade’.The evidence of the Test Identification Parade is received under section 9 of the evidence act. Test Identification Parade is meant to test the veracity of the witness and his capacity to identify unknown persons.

Test Identification Parade holds significant importance in criminal investigations as it serves as a tool to establish the identity of the accused. The process involves presenting a suspect alongside individuals who resemble them in physical appearance to a witness, allowing the witness to identify the alleged offender. This identification becomes a vital piece of evidence in the court proceedings.

Purpose of TIP

The purpose of Test Identification Parade is to test and strengthen trustworthiness of substantive evidence of a witness in court Ram Babu v. State of U.P.^[1]

The primary purpose of a Test Identification Parade is to confirm or establish the identity of the accused. It is conducted to ensure that the witness identifies the perpetrator based on their memory rather than external influences. This helps in strengthening the prosecution’s case and providing a fair chance for the defense to challenge the identification process. During investigation of the crime, the police agency is required to hold TIP for the purpose of enabling the witness to identify the person alleged to have committed the offense particularly when such person was not previously known to witnesses or informant.

The main purpose of holding a TIP during the interrogation stage is to test the memory of witnesses based upon first impression and also to enable the prosecution to decide whether all or any of them could be cited as eye-witnesses of the crime.

In Daya Singh v. State of Haryana^[2]

It was observed that the purpose of conducting a Test Identification Parade is two fold. First, it is to enable the witnesses to satisfy themselves that the prisoner whom they suspect is really the one who was seen by them in connection with the commission of the crime. Secondly, it is to satisfy the investigating authorities that the suspect is the real person whom the witnesses had connection with said occurrence.

Procedure of TIP

Test identification parade is generally held when the accused is in the judicial custody and the jail superintendent arranges for production of the accused persons before the judicial magistrate in jail by mixing 10 other accused persons of the same stature as that of the accused with the main accused person.The accused has the right to be represented during the TIP, and any discrepancies in the procedure may lead to the identification being considered unreliable.

Role of Forensic Evidence

While TIPs rely on eyewitness identification, advancements in forensic technology have introduced additional means of establishing identity. DNA evidence, fingerprint analysis, and other forensic techniques play a complementary role in confirming or challenging the accuracy of witness identifications.

For identification of accused by Parade

Parade identification involves presenting a suspect among other individuals for witnesses to identify. However, it raises concerns about reliability, as it may lead to misidentification due to various factors such as stress or suggestion. Legal systems often employ safeguards like random lineup composition and informing witnesses that the suspect may not be present. The accuracy of identification can be influenced by witness memory and the circumstances of the crime. Some jurisdictions increasingly rely on double-blind procedures or photo arrays to minimize bias. While parade identification can be a tool, its limitations highlight the importance of additional evidence in criminal investigations.

Identification of accused by photograph

In a test identification parade, the accused is presented alongside individuals who resemble them in physical features. The procedure involves witnesses examining a series of photographs, including one of the suspect, without prior knowledge of the suspect’s placement. The goal is to determine if the witness can correctly identify the accused based on their memory of the incident. It’s crucial to ensure a fair lineup, avoiding suggestive elements that could influence identification. Properly conducted, this procedure aids in assessing the accuracy of eyewitness identification, a critical aspect in criminal investigations and legal proceedings.

Identification by Fingerprint

In a fingerprint identification parade, multiple individuals display their fingerprints for examination. Forensic experts analyze ridge patterns, minutiae points, and overall characteristics to match the crime scene print. The process involves meticulous scrutiny, comparing ridge patterns’ uniqueness and minutiae details like ridge endings and bifurcations. The goal is to find a precise match, affirming or excluding suspects based on fingerprint evidence. This method relies on the distinctiveness of each person’s fingerprint, emphasizing the reliability of fingerprint analysis in criminal investigations.

The identification parade serves as a crucial tool in establishing the connection between a suspect and a crime through meticulous fingerprint examination.The accepted conclusion of science is that several fixed and typical varieties of ridges on fingertips are clearly distinguishable. Hence Identity of finger marks is the strongest evidence of the identity of a person and such evidence is admissible.

Landmark Cases on Test Identification Parade

Hare Kishan Singh v. State of Bihar^[3]

The Supreme Court held that when a witness has failed to identify the accused at the test identification parade, the court identification of the accused by the witness becomes unreliable. In such cases, the court identification may be considered useless and it can weaken the prosecution’s case.

Suraj Pal Singh v. State of Haryana^[4]

The Supreme Court clarified that the accused cannot be compelled to participate in a Test Identification Parade. If the accused chooses not to undergo the test identification parade, they do so at their own risk

Evidentiary Value of TIP

A Test Identification Parade (TIP) is a crucial aspect of criminal investigations, providing evidentiary value in the judicial process. This procedure involves presenting a suspect to a witness for potential identification, and its significance lies in its ability to establish or challenge the identity of the alleged offender.One primary aspect of the evidentiary value of TIP is its role in corroborating eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness identification can be pivotal in criminal cases, but it is susceptible to errors.

TIP serves as a method to test the reliability of such identifications. The process is structured to minimize suggestive cues, ensuring that the witness identifies the suspect based on memory rather than external influences. This helps in bolstering the credibility of eyewitness accounts and adds weight to the prosecution’s case.Moreover, TIP contributes to the overall fairness of the legal system. It is designed to prevent misidentification, a factor that can lead to wrongful convictions. By conducting a properly administered TIP, the justice system aims to reduce the likelihood of innocent individuals being wrongly accused and convicted.

This procedural safeguard enhances the integrity of the legal process and fosters public confidence in the judicial system.Additionally, TIP serves as a tool for the defense to challenge the prosecution’s case. If a witness fails to identify the suspect during the parade, it raises questions about the accuracy of the allegations. This lack of identification can be presented as reasonable doubt, influencing the court’s decision. The defense can argue that the absence of recognition weakens the prosecution’s claim and calls into question the reliability of the evidence.

However, it is essential to recognize the limitations of TIP in terms of evidentiary value. The circumstances under which the identification takes place, the duration between the crime and the parade, and the psychological stress on the witness are factors that can impact the reliability of the identification. These limitations highlight the need for careful administration and documentation of TIP procedures to ensure their admissibility in court.

All necessary precautions should be taken to avoid any kind of influences. These parades are essentially governed by Section 162, CrPC. This is the reason why the Test Identification Parade is held under the supervision of the Magistrate.

In Ayyub v. State of UP,^[5]

Judicial Magistrate, in whose presence the Test Identification Parade was held cannot be examined since it has expired. The prosecution witness deposed in detail, steps taken in conducting Test Identification Parade.

In the case of Ravi Kapur v. State of Rajasthan^[6]

The court held that the Court Identification itself is a good identification in the eye of law. It is not always necessary that it must be preceded by the test identification parade. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of a given case .

In the case of R. Shaji v. State of Kerala^[7]

In this case it was upheld that in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case where the witnesses made it clear that they were acquainted with the appellant since he was posted in the control room of their city, holding/non-holding of a Test Identification Parade loses its significance

Effect of delay on Test Identification Parade

The delay in conducting a Test Identification Parade (TIP) can have significant consequences on the accuracy and reliability of witness identifications in legal proceedings. Timely TIPs are crucial for preserving the freshness of witnesses’ memories and ensuring a fair trial.Firstly, delays can lead to memory degradation, making it more challenging for witnesses to recall details accurately. As time passes, individuals may forget specific features or nuances of the event, increasing the likelihood of misidentifications during the TIP. This memory decay is a well-documented phenomenon that can compromise the integrity of eyewitness testimonies.

Moreover, delayed TIPs may create opportunities for external influences to affect witnesses’ memories. Exposure to media coverage, discussions with other witnesses, or even personal reflection can introduce biases and distortions. The longer the delay, the greater the potential for external factors to shape or taint a witness’s recollection, leading to unreliable identifications.In addition, the legal admissibility of evidence may be jeopardized due to delays in conducting TIPs.

Defense attorneys may argue that the passage of time has compromised the fairness of the identification process, raising concerns about the reliability of the evidence presented in court. This could impact the weight assigned to eyewitness testimonies and influence the overall credibility of the legal proceedings.

Furthermore, delayed TIPs may impede the investigative process, making it harder for law enforcement to apprehend suspects promptly. Quick and accurate identifications are essential for efficient criminal investigations, and delays in TIPs can hinder the timely resolution of cases.

In Md Sajjad v. State of West Bengal^[8]

In this case the supreme court held that the Test Identification Parade should be held at earliest at the possible opportunity, but there is no hard and fast rule that can be laid down in this regard.

Exception of Test Identification Parade

The Test Identification Parade (TIP) is a legal process where a witness attempts to identify a suspect from a lineup or a set of photographs. However, the “Test Identification Parade Exception” refers to situations where the court may allow identification evidence even if the TIP was not conducted properly. This exception recognizes that certain circumstances, such as fear of reprisal or the nature of the crime, may hinder the conventional TIP process.Courts may consider the reliability of the identification, assessing factors like the witness’s opportunity to observe the suspect during the crime, the witness’s degree of attention, and the accuracy of any prior descriptions provided.

If the court deems the identification trustworthy despite TIP irregularities, it may admit the evidence.However, the exception is not absolute, and courts typically require strong justification for deviating from proper TIP procedures. The goal is to balance the need for justice with the rights of the accused, ensuring a fair trial while considering the complexities surrounding witness identification in certain circumstances.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, Test Identification Parades play a crucial role in criminal investigations and court proceedings, serving as a means to establish the identity of the accused. The legal framework provided by the CrPC guides the conduct of TIPs, emphasizing fairness and transparency. However, challenges and concerns persist, prompting the need for continuous reforms and the integration of modern forensic techniques to enhance the reliability of witness identifications. As the legal landscape evolves, ensuring the accuracy and fairness of TIPs remains essential for upholding justice in criminal proceedings.

Reference

Batuk Lal Law of Evidence 23rd Edition 2020 Central Law Agency.

Mayank Madhaw Law of Evidence 3rd Edition 2019 Singhal Law Publication.

Lawbhoomi.com

1. AIR 2010 SC 2143 ↑
2. AIR 2001 SC 1183 ↑
3. AIR 1988 SC 863 ↑
4. 1995 2 SCC 64 ↑
5. AIR 2002 SC 1192 ↑
6. 2012 9 SCC 284 ↑
7. AIR 2013 SC 651 ↑
8. AIR 2017 SC 642 ↑