Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Identification - Evidentry value. - The test identification parade conducted by a police officer alone attracts the operation of Section 162, Cr. P.Code which makes that evidence inadmissible. The evidence of identification proceedings is not be to rejected on the sole ground that the accused person was on bail. The value to be attached to an identification pa- rade depends upon circumstances of each case. The main considerations before the court are whether the identification parade was conducted in a fair manner, and whether witnesses in fact saw the accused between the commission of the offence and identification parade. When accused person is on bail and he is to be put up for identification, the responsibility for keeping himself away from prosecution witnesses lies mainly upon him. The responsibility of the accused is all the greater in a case where he gives an undertaking to keep himself in Court till the day of identification. In such case the prosecution cannot do much for keeping the accused away from prosecution witnesses. Where the property to be identified was not sealed at the time of the recovery, little value can be attached to the test identification proceeding. But even a total failure to hold a test identification proceeding would not make in admissible the evidence of identification in Court. Normally the result of identification proceedings in which a particular accused is put up must alone be taken into consideration in deciding the value of identification of a particular witness with respect to that accused; other test identifications, provided they were held within a short period of the test under consideration, can be taken into account solely for judging the memory and power of observation of the witness concerned. In case the witnesses do not give the name of any accused, it is necessary to hold a test identification parade. Where, however, a witness gives the name of an accused as one whom he has identified, ordinarily no test identification parade is necessary. But if any accused holds out a challenge and says that he will not be identified by the witnesses, or makes a prayer that he should be put upon a test identification parade, such a parade must always be held in order to meet the challenge. There, must, however, be one exception. If the accused is arrested on the spot and if he is in custody from that time upto the date of his trial, there can be no question at all about his identity. If a parade is held, it will be a test of the memory of the witnesses concerned. If cannot be possibly be a factor of any if importance on the question of identification because the accused all the time remained in jail. If the Court reasonably comes to the conclusion that there may be force in the prayer of the accused for test identification, it should direct the holding of a regular test identification in order that the witness veracity may be tested. The court has ample power under Section 540, Cr.P.Code to secure this evidence.