Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.298 OF 1994 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 6.9.1994 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari, in Sessions Trial No. 326/3 of 1986/87) 1. SHANKAR SAHNI, SON OF DHARICHAN SAHNI, RESIDENT OF HARNA NARAINPUR, P.S. MADHUBAN, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. 2. YOGENDRA SAHNI, SON OF DHINGAN SAHNI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – HARNA NARAINPUR, P.S. MADHUBAN, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. 3. BIPIN DEO @ BIPINDEO SINGH, SON OF BENIDEO, RESIDENT OF BARA GOVIND, P.S. PIPRA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. APPELLANTS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR -------RESPONDENT For the Appellants : Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The Appellants have been convicted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari, in Sessions Trial No. 326/3 of 1986/87 by a Judgment dated 6.9.1994. The case of the prosecution is that a dacoity was committed in the house of the Informant on the night between 14/15.5.1985 by unknown Dacoits. Later on, the Appellants were picked up and put on Test Identification Parade. It appears that the prosecution in all, examined 14 witnesses out of whom PWs-1 to 4 have stated about identification of the accused persons. PW-5 is the Informant but he did not identify any accused. PW-2 is said to have identified the Appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 whereas the Appellant No. 3 is said to have identified the Appellant 2 Nos. 1 and 2. PW-4 is said to have identified Appellant No. 1. Admittedly, no incriminating articles were recovered from the house of the Appellants and it has come in evidence that the identification was through the light of lantern which was not produced by the prosecution. From the evidence of prosecution, it also transpires that the Test Identification Parade was held more than a month after the occurrence and the identifying witnesses were merely 10 years and 13 years of age at the time of occurrence. The prosecution witnesses have also admitted that the Appellants belong to the same Panchayats and the five defence witnesses have brought on record a number of documents to prove that in fact, they were well known to the prosecution party and, therefore, the story of identification in the Test Identification Parade was baseless in absence of they not being named as accused at the earliest instance in the First Information Report. These facts assume importance in view of the Informant not identifying any of the accused persons in the Test Identification Parade. In the result, the Appeal is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants in Sessions Trial No. 326/3 of 1986/87 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari, is hereby set aside. The Appellants are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds. Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 7th April, 2011 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)