MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
[2017] 1 S.C.R. 265, Supreme Court of India, 2017
Outcome: Appeal(s) allowed (Granted)
Segment: Ratio
[2017] l S.C.R. 265 
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1953 of20 l 0) 
JANUARY 06, 2017 
[PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND 
UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860: s.302 r!w s.34 - Conviction under - Delay 
in holding Test Identification Parade - Effect of - Dead body of 
husband of PW-8 found lying on the road - Death was due to 
strangulation and head injuries - Entire prosecution case rested 
on the identification by prosecution witnesses and on the suspicion 
expressed by PW-8 which arose out of dispute in connection with 
business - Prosecution witnesses stated that they saw four persons 
in the company of the deceased on previous night of murder and 
recognized appellant and co-accused in the Test Identification 
Parade - Conviction by courts below - On appeal, held: None of 
the prosecution witnesses had given any identification marks or 
disclosed special features or attributes of any of the four persons 
in general and the accused in particular - No incident or crime 
had actually taken place in presence of these prosecution 
witnesses - Identification parade itself was held two 111onths after 
the incident of murder - Their chance meeting was also in the night 
without there being any special occasion for the111 to notice the 
. features of any of the accused which would then register in their 
minds so as to enable them to identifY them on a future date - In the 
circumstances, such identification si111plicitor· cannot for111 the
basis 
or be taken as the fulcrum for the entire case of prosecution - The 
suspicion expressed by PW-8 was also not enough to record the 
finding of guilt against the appellant - Prosecution having failed 
to establish its case against the appellant, benefit of doubt granted 
to the appellant and he is acquitted of all charges. 
Criminal law: Acquittal of accused-appellant - Entitlement 
of non-appealing accused to claim acquittal - Held: If on evaluation 
of case, a conclusion is reached that no conviction of any accused 
was possible the benefit of that decision must be extended to the 
265 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
266 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[20 I 7] I S.C.R. 
A 
similarly situated co-accused even though he had not challenged 
the order by way of appeal. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. In the present case, apart from the identification 
by PWs 3, 5 and 16 and their version that they bad seen the 
deceased in the company of four persons on the night intervening 
11.7.1993 and 12.7.1993, there .is nothing which could point in 
the direction of the. guilt of the appellant and non-appealing 
accused. The confessional statement having been discarded, 
there is no other material to lend any corroboration. The matter 
thus stands and rests purely on the identification by PWs 3, 5 and 
16 apart from the suspicion expressed by PW 8. Apart from the 
fact that there was delay in holding the Test Identification Parade, 
one s,triking feature is that none of the concerned prosecution 
witnesses bad given any identification marks or disclosed special 
features or attributes of any of those four persons in general and 
the accused in particular. Further, no incident or crime bad 
actually taken place in the presence of those prosecution 
witnesses no'r any special circumstances had occurred which' would 
invite their' attention so as to register the features or special 
attributes of. the concerned accused. Their chance meeting, iis 
alleged, was. in the night and was only for.some fleeting moments. 
[Paras 13, 15] [273-B-C; 274-E-F] 
Lal Singh and others v. State of
U.f. (2003) 12 SCC 
554; Su_bash v. State qf U.P. (1987) 3 SCC 331 : [1987] 
2 SCR 962 ; Musheer Khan v. State of MP. (2010) 2 
SCC 748 : [2010] 2 SCR 119 - relied on. 
2. It is true that in certain cases this Court bad granted 
benefit even to a non-appealing accused. In • Bijoy Singll case, 
this Court observed that if on evaluation of case, a conclusion is 
reached that no conviction of any accused was possible the benefit 
of that decision must be extended to the similarly situated 
co-accused even though be bad not challenged the order by way 
of appeal. In the circumstances, the judgments of conviction 
recorded by the courts below against the appellant is set aside 
and be is acqnitted of all the charges leveled against him. The 
benefit of this acquittal will also enure to the advantage of the 
non- appealing accused. [Paras 19, 20] [276-F-G; 277-B]
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
267 
Bijoy Singh v. State ~f Bihar (2002) 8 SCC 147; Suresh 
A 
Chaudhary v. State of Bihar (2003) 4 SCC 128; Pawan 
Kumar v. State of Haryana (2003) 11 SCC 241: [2003] 
1 Suppl. SCR 710; Mohinder Singh and Anr. v. State of 
Punjab and Others (2004) 12 SCC 311 - .relied on. 
Case Law Reference 
(2003) 12 sec 554 
relied on 
Para 14 
(1987] 2 SCR 962 
relied on . 
Para 16 
[2010] 2 SCR 119 
relied on 
Para 17 
(2002) 8 sec 147 
relied on 
Para 19 
(2003) 4 sec 128 
relied on 
Para 19 
[2003] 1 Suppl. SCR 710 
relied on 
Para 19 
(2004) 12 sec 311 
relied on 
Para 19 
CRIMIN AL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1953 of2010. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.04.2010 of the High Court 
at Calcutta in C.R.A. No. 53of1997. 
B 
c 
D 
Anand Dey, Ms. Rajeshri N. Reddy, A. N. Singh, Merusagar 
E 
Samantaray, Advs. for the Appellant. 
Mrinal Kanti Manda!, Parijat Sinha, Advs. for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
UDAY UMESH LALIT, J. I. This appeal by special leave 
challenges the Judgment and Order dated 20.04.20 I 0 passed by the 
High Court at Calcutta dismissing Criminal Appeal No.53 of 1997 
preferred by the appellant herein and thereby affirming his conviction 
and sentence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal 
Code (for short "!PC"). 
2. According to the prosecution, on 12.07 .1993 at about 6.00 AM 
PW6 Gautam Kheto found a dead body lying on the road in front of
his 
house with a handkerchief tied around the neck. He reported the incident 
which was recorded in G.D. B'ook of Muchipara Police Station dated 
12.07.1993, whereafter the police conducted inquest on the dead body 
and sent it for autopsy. The dead body was having a tattoo on the right 
F 
G 
H
268 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
fore-ann with "Ramchandra Singh" written in Hindi. Post-mortem 
examination was conducted by PW! 8 Dr. Rabindra Basu who opined 
that the death was due to strangulation and the ligature mark and head 
injuries were ante-mortem in nature. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
3. At about 10.10 PM on the same day i.e. 12.07.1993 PW4 Jai 
Kishore Guin came to Muchipara Police Station and made a statement 
that he had heard conversation between PW3 Kailash Srivastava and 
PW16 Shyamlal Jadav which suggested that they had knowledge about 
the incident. The investigating officer could then find both PW! 6 Kailash 
Srivastava and PW6 Shyamlal Yadav on 13.07.1993. According to both 
these witnesses they had seen an old man and four other persons alighting 
from a taxi near a sweetmeat shop in Akrur Dutta Lane and that the old 
man, who was in drunken condition was taken away by the other persons. 
According to these witnesses, the number of taxi was 3157. The 
investigating officer then located the taxi driver, i.e. PW5 Laxminarayan 
Dey, who stated that in the intervening night of 11.07.1993 and 12.07.1993 
five persons had boarded his taxi, four persons were younger in age, 
while one was an old man. According to this witness there was some 
altercation amongst them; that near a sweetmeat shop all of them 
alighted and that when they came back only four of them had returned. 
He thereafter dropped them at Rajabazar. 
4. PW8 Saraswati Singh lodged a
report on 16.07 .1993 that her 
husband named Ramchandra Singh was missing since l l .07.1993. Two 
days later she was called to the police station and shown certain 
photographs but she could not identify the picture. After few days, she 
again went to the police station with her nephew who could identify the 
picture to be that of Ramchandra Singh, the husband of said PWS 
Saraswati Si~h. 
5. On the strength of suspicion expressed by said PWS Saraswati 
Singh the appellant Mohd. Sajjad and one Sk. Sahid @ Bablu were 
arrested on 09 .09 .1993 and 11.09 .1993 respectively. Both these persons 
were subjected to test identification parade on 06. I 0.1993 in which PWs 
3, 5 and 16 identified them. After completion ofinvestigation charge-sheet 
was filed against the appellant and said Sk. Sahid @ Bablu for the 
offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC while 
three persons, namely, Mohd. Sehzada, Sheikh Kaloo and Sheikh Panchu 
were stated to have been absconding and declared as proclaimed 
offenders.
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
269 
[UDAY UMESH LALIT, J.] 
. 
1 
6. The prosecution principally relied upon the testimony of PWs 
3, 5, 8 and 16. PW3 Kailash Srivastava in his deposition stated as under: 
"I live at No,8, Gopi Lane, Bowbazar, Calcutta. I am a plumber. 
I know Haripada Das. He was my previous employer. I slet;p at 
Premises No.8, Gopi Bose Lane, Calcutta. In the night of 
11.07 .1993 an incident took place. That night there was pain in 
the stomach ofHaripada Das. Haripada Das lives In No,J, New 
Bowbazar Lane, which is close to my residence. At abOut 1 ::U 
12: 15 in .that night a man came from Haripada and awoke me 
from sleep. I went to Haripada's place with that man. Haripada 
told me that he should be immediately hospitalized for the pain in 
hisstomach. Then myself went to search out a taxi to take 
Haripada to Hospital. Snyamlal Yadav is a driver. Haripada Das 
is a plumber contractor. We went towards Nirmal Ch. Street for 
a taxi. We saw a taxi entering Akrur Dutta Lane from Nirmal 
Ch. Street. We also entered Akroor Dutta Lane to catch the taxL 
We saw the taxi to stop near sweetmeat shop in Akroor Dutta 
Lane. We saw about 5 persons getting down from the tal(i. We 
approached the taxi driver to hire the taxi for taking the patient to 
hospital. The taxi driver refused to take the patientto the hospitaL 
The other persons who got dowri from the taxi also got annoyed 
with us and told us to go away because they would take the taxi
for return journey. There was an old man in the taxi. And other 
4 persons scolded us by saying us to away. We found the old man 
to be in drunken condition. The old man was taken out of the taxi, 
the other persons present there. Then we came away from the 
place after noting the number of that taxi. Thenumber of the taxi 
·was 3157. We noted the number of that taxi because the driver 
refused io .. take the patient to hospital with the idea that we should 
lodge diarY against the driver. We saw those persons by the electric 
light that was burning on the road. If I now see 'lllty of those 
persons I may recognize those persons who got down from the 
taxi that night." 
PW 16 Shyamlal Yadav supported the version of PW3 Kaih1sh 
Srivastava and deposed on similar lines. PW5 Laxminarayan Dey 
deposed that on the night intervening 11.07 .1993 and 12.07 .1993 five 
persons had boarded his taxi. He also deposed to the fact that while the 
taxi had stopped near a sweetmeat shop two persons had come to hire 
his taxi and that there was some altercation with those persons. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
270 
At. 
B 
c. 
D 
E 
F, 
G, 
H 
\.. ·"S:l!JPREME COURT REPORTS 
(20 IJ] I 'S.C.R. 
, ' · 7 .. PW8 Saraswati .Singh in h.er examination stated as under: 
'· . '"My husband's i1ic'otf1e bui of sdlaty was not sufficient to maintain 
·our family. To make up the income to meet the family expenses, 
.. 'I used to tilty ketosene oil from Scott Lane Market and sale it at 
highef price at my residence. I used to earn profit of Rs.30/40 
· per:day:· In ·course of my business iii kerosene· oil, I picked 
·, · acqu·aihtance· with a' boy "Who used to sell kerosene oil on that 
market. His name is Raju which I gathered from him. Raju with 
•other boys used to visit·our house iii connection with my business 
• ·.·.in kerosene. I enqulredthe name of those persons accompanying 
Raj1i' and learhtfrom him that one of them Was Sahajad, another 
• ; · wasBilblu', the other one was Panchu and another was Ka loo. I 
·used tci purchase kerosene oif'froril'Rajo as he used to sell me oil 
·aH:heaper price thai1 ·others." 
, 
' 
. S.he further stat~<! tl).a( there were some disputes with Raju in 
conne9tion .with the aforesiµd business. ~s regards disappearance of 
her husb;md and th~ _steps tak~n by her thereafter she stated as under: 
-'~My ,husband.did not die in our home. In the night of 11"' July 
_ l 993, my husband·did-not return home, .Sometimes my husband 
used to pass night outside home but he used to come back home 
... regularly.' Next day I- went to·the police station to lodge a diary.
·.When I met a police officer there with dress who was going out 
of P.S; I told him that my husband did not return home that night 
and I wanted to make a diary, He asked me whether my husband 
used to drink or not and'J told himtht my husband used to drink . 
. He advised·to me to.search'irithe police station and in the hospital 
. for my husband. Thereafter, ·I; went to Entally Police Station but 
did not find my·husbarid_there. I then again went to Bowbazar 
P:S. but I did not find my husband there. Then I wentto Amherest 
.:street P.S .. andtherefrom.! went to Jorasanko P.S. but I did not 
···· 
find my husband anywhere there. On the next day I went to my 
relation's house. I went to Bhawanipore at the house of my 
husband's sister. They.informed me that my husband di\! not go 
, .. to their pli,ice and ~sked me 'to diarize the matt.er. Then I went to 
· , \:hapdernagore there fn,im my husband's po-villagers used to live 
qµi I did not find my hus\ll\Ild there also. i also went to Medical 
. ,. i:;oll~ge Hospital, then to Compbel Hospital. I also searched in 
P:G..Ho.spital for. my husband ;but I. .did not find my husband
MD. SAJJAD@ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
[UDAY UMESH LAUT, J.] 
. anywhere. On 16"'ofthat month my husband'.s sister son came 
· to our house and scolded me for not diarizing the matter. Then I 
went to Muchipara P.S. and lodged a diary. After 2 days I was 
called from the P.S., I was shown some photographs in the P.S. 
As I could not distantly recognized the person from the photograph 
. !told the police to call my husband's sister's son who could identify 
that person from the picture as I have defect in eye-sight. My 
husband's sister's son then came to us on 24•• of that month. I 
went to the police station with him and he saw the photographs 
and identified the picture of the photograph as that of his Mama 
i.e. my husband. Then myself with Shib Kumar Singh, my 
· husband's sister's son went to N.R.S. Hospital (Campbel). Then 
I identified the body by comparing with the photograph in that 
hospital to be the dead body of my husband ....... " 
8. The prosecution also pressed into service confessional statement 
given by Sk. Sahid @ Bablu under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which was 
recorded by PW! 9, thethen Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta on 
27.09.93. Insofar as test identification is concerned, the prosecution 
relied upon the testimony of PWl7, Metropolitan Magistrate Calcutta 
who testified that in the test identification parade PWS Laxmi Narayan 
Dey and PW3 Kailash Srivastava could identify both the accused while 
PW16 Shyamlal Yadav could identify only
the appellant. 
9. After considering the material on record the trial court found 
that the prosecution was successful in bringing home its case against 
both the accused. Though the evidence regarrl'c·:g confession was 
discarded by the trial court, it found the evidence of three witnesses, 
namely, PWs 3; 5 and 16 regarding identification of the accused to be 
trustworthy. It observed as under: 
"It is true that the Test Identification Parade was held two months 
after the incident of murder but the accused were absconded and 
they were arrested on 9"' September and 11th September and the 
Test Identification Parade was held on 61• October, 1993. It is 
also true thatthe witnesses did not disclose or give any description 
of the accused in their statement before the police. But the fact 
that the accused were identified by the witnesses in Court which 
is substantive evidence and the proceedings of Test Identification 
Parade are used to corroborative evidence. But, it should be 
remembered here also that this is not only evidence on the 
271 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
272 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2017) I S.C.R. 
A 
prosecution side as the prosecution case hinges on circumstantial 
evidence and besides the evidence of identification of the accused 
of three PWs which is merely a link of the chain of circumstances 
while there are other names which have completed the chain. I 
reiterate here that the names of the accused came out from the 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
statement of the widow who has given a vivid description of the 
incident as to how they (accused) came colder to her family while 
dealing in kerosene oil and the motive of the accused as ascribed 
by her to commit the murder of her husband was to grab her 
money and for committing some other heinous crimes of which 
the PWlO has stated in her evidence. So, when the entire chain 
of circumstantial evidence is complete, it is futile to challenge any 
link separately unless there is glaring instance of disbelief." 
10. The ~ircumstances that the deceased was last seen in the 
company of four persons including the appellant and sa.id Sk •. Sahid @ 
Bablu and that the appellant had disputes with PWS, wife of the deceased, 
weighed with the trial court in accepting the case of the prosecution. 
The Trial Court did not find it safe to rely on the confessional statement 
of Sk. Shahid@ Bablu. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 19.12.1996 
convicted the appellant and said Sk. Sahid @ Bablu for the offences 
punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 !PC. After hearing 
the parties,
the trial court by its order dated 23.12.96 sentenced both the 
accused to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-
each, in default whereof to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. 
11. It appears that Sk. Sahid @ Bablu did not preferany appeal 
against his cenviction and sentence while the appellant carried the matter 
by filing Criminal Appeal No.53 of 1997 challenging his conviction and 
sentence. The High Court affirmed the view taken by the trial court and 
dismissed the said criminal appeal vide its judgment dated 20.04.2010 
which is presently under appeal. 
12. Appearing for the appellant, Mr. Anand Dey, learned Advocate 
submitted that the entire case rests on the suspicion expressed by PW 8 
Saraswati S_in-1Jb arising from some disputes in connection with the business 
and the identification by PW s 3, 5 and 16. lt was submitted that the Test 
ldetTtification Parade was held more than two and half months after the 
incident and in any case 25 days after the arrest of the accused. In his 
submission, such Test Identification Parade was completely flawed. To
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
[UDAY UMESH LALIT, J.] 
a pointed question that ifthe appellant deserved acquittal whether such 
acquittal would enure to the advantage of the other accused who had 
not even preferred an appeal, Mr. Mrinal Kanti Manda] learned Advocate 
appearing for the Respondent-State submitted in the affirmative. 
13. In the present case, apart from the identification by PW s 3, 5 
and 16 and their version that they had seen the deceased in the company 
of four persons on the night intervening 11.7.1993 and 12.7.1993, there 
is nothing which could point in the directt9n of the guilt of the appellant 
and said Sk. Sahid @ Bablu. The confessional statement having been 
discarded, there is no other material to lend any corroboration. The matter 
thus stands and rests purely on the identification by PWs 3, 5 and 16 
apart from the suspicion expressed by PW 8 Saraswati Singh .. 
14. In Lal Singh and others Vs. State of U.P.1 , this court in 
Paragraphs 28 and 43 dealt with the value or weightage to be attached 
to Test Identification Parade and the effect of delay in holding such Test 
Identification Parade. Said paragraphs are as under:-
"28. The next question is whether the prosecution has proved 
beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants are the real culprits . 
. The value to be attached to a test identification parade depends 
on the facts and circumstances of each case and no hard-and-
fast rule can be laid down. The court has to
examine the facts of 
the case to find out whether there was sufficient opportunity for 
the witnesses to identify the accused. The court has also to i:ule 
out the possibility of their having been shown to the witnesses 
before holding a test identification parau~. Where there is an 
inordinate delay in holding a test identification parade, the court 
must adopt a cautious approach so as to prevent miscarriage of 
justice. In cases of inordin<ite delay, it may be that the witnesses 
may forget the features of the accused put up for identification in 
the test identification parade. This, however, is not an absolute 
rule because it depends upon the facts of each case and the 
opportunity which the witnesses had to notice the features of the 
accused and the circumstances in which they had seen the accused 
committing the offence. Where the witness had only a fleeting 
glimpse of the accused at the time of occurrence, delay in holding 
a test identification parade has to be viewed seriously. Where, 
however, the court is satisfied that the witnesses had ample 
-----
1 2003 (12) sec 554 
273 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
274 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[20 I 7] I S.C.R. 
A 
opportunity of seeing the accused at the time of the commission 
of the offence and there is no chance of mistaken identity, delay 
in holding the test identification parade may not be held to be 
fatal. It all depends upon the facts and circumstances of each 
case. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
43. It will thus be seen that the evidence of identification has to 
be considered in the peculiar facts and circumstances of each 
case. Though it is desirable to hold the test identification parade 
at the earliest-possible opportunity, no hard-and-fast rule can be 
laid down in this regard. If the delay is inordinate and there is 
evidence probabilising the possibility of the accused having been 
shown to the witnesses, the court may not act on the basis of 
such evidence. Moreover, cases where the conviction is based 
not solely on the basis of identification in court, but on the basis of 
other corroborative evidence, such as recovery of looted articles, 
stand on a different footing and the court has to consider the 
evidence in its entirety." 
15. In the case in hand, apart from the fact that there was delay 
in holding the Test Identification Parade, one striking feature is that none 
of the concerned prosecution witnesses had given any identification marks 
or disclosed special features or attributes of any of those four persons in 
general and the accused in particular. Further, no incident or crime had 
actually taken place in the
presence of those prosecution witnesses nor 
any special circumstances had occurred which would invite their attention 
so as to register the features or special attributes of the concerned 
accused. Their chance meeting, as alteged, was in the night and was 
only for some fleeting moments. 
16. In Subas/1 Vs. State of U.P. 2, the aspects of delay as well as 
absence of any special features for identification and the effect thereof 
were considered by this court in paragraphs 8 and 9 as under:-
"8. Apart from this infirmity we further find that Shiv Shankar 
was not put up for test identification parade promptly. The 
identification parade has been held three weeks after his arrest 
and no explanation has been offered for the delay in holding the 
test identification parade. There is, therefore, room for doubt as 
'1987 (2J sec 331
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
[UDAY UMESH LAUT, J.] 
to whether the delay in holding the identification parade was in 
order to enable the identifying witnesses to see him in the police 
lock-up or in the jail premises and make a note of his features. 
9. Over and above all these things there remains the fact that 
a sufficiently long interval of time had elapsed between the date 
of occurrence when the witnesses had seen Shiv Shankar for a 
few minutes and the date of the test identification parade. It is, no 
doubt, true that all the three witnesses had correctly identified 
Shiv Shankar at the identification parade but it has to be borne in 
mind that nearly 4 months had elapsed during the interval. It is 
relevant to mention here that neither in Exhibit Kha-1 nor in their 
statements during investigation, the eyewitnesses have given any 
descriptive particulars of Shiv Shankar. While deposing before 
the Sessions Judge they have stated that Shiv Shankar was a tall 
person and had "sallow" complexion. If it is on account of these 
features the witnesses were able to identify Shiv Shankar at the 
identification parade, they would have certainly mentioned about 
them at the earliest point of time because their memory would 
have been fresh then. Thus in the absence of any descriptive 
particulars of Shiv Shankar in Ex. Kha-1 or in the statements of 
witnesses during investigation, it will not be safe and proper to act 
upon the identification of Shiv
Shankar by the three witnesses at 
the identification parade and hold that he was one of the assailants 
of Ram Babu. As pointed out in Muthuswami v. State of 
Madras'where an identification parade was held about 2 Y, months 
after the occurrence it would not be safe to place reliance on the 
identification of the accused by the eyewitnesses. ,In another case 
Mohd. Abdul Hafeez v. State of A.P.' It was held that where the 
witnesses had not given any description of the accused in the first 
information report,.their identification of the accused atthe sessions 
trial cannot be safely accepted by the court.for awarding conviction 
to the accused. In the present case there was a long interval of 
nearly 4 months before the test identification parade was heid 
and it is difficult to accept that in spite of this interval of time the 
witnesses were able to have a clear image of the accused in their 
minds and identify him correctly at the identification parade." 
'AIR 1954 SC 4~1954 Cri LJ 236 
'AIR 1983 SC 367='(1983) 1sec143 
275 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
276 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[201 7] 1 S.C.R. 
17. Similarly the issue of delay weighed with this court in Mus/teer 
Kltan vs. State of M.P! in discarding the evidence regarding test 
identification as under: 
"8. Insofar as the identification of A-5 is concerned that has 
taken place at a very delayed stage, namely, his identification took 
place on 24-1-2001 and the incident is of29-l l-2000, even· though 
A-5 was arrested on 22-12-2000. There is no explanation why his 
identification parade was held on 24-1-2001 which is after a gap 
of over a month from the date of arrest and after about 3 months 
from the date of the incident. No reliance ought to ~ave been 
placed by the courts below or the High Court on such delayed TI 
parade for which there is no explanation by the prosecution." 
18. In the instant case none of the witnesses had disclosed any 
features for identification which would lend some corroboration. The 
identification parade itself was held 25 days after the arrest. Their chance 
meeting was also in the night without there being any special occasion 
forthem to notice the features of any of the accused which would then 
register in their minds so as to enable them to identify them on a future 
date. The chance meeting was also for few minutes. In the circumstances, 
in our considered view such identification simplicitor cannot form the 
basis or be taken as the fulcrum for the entire case of prosecution. The 
suspicion expressed by PW
8 Saraswati Singh was also not enough to 
record the finding of guilt against the appellant. We therefore grant 
benefit of doubt to the appellant and hold that the prosecution has failed 
to establish its case against the appellant. 
19. Mr. Mrinal Kanti Manda!, learned Advocate is right in 
submitting that in certain cases this Court had granted benefit even to a 
non-appealing accused. In Bijoy Singlt v. State of Bi/tar', this court 
observed that if on evaluation of the case, a conclusion is reached that 
no conviction of any accused was possible the benefit of that decision 
must be extended to the similarly situated co-accused even though he 
had not challenged the order by way of the appeal. To similar effect 
was the dictum of this court in Sureslt Cltautlltary v. State of Biliar' 
'2010 c2J sec 748 
'2002 (SJ sec 147 
'2003 (4) sec 128
MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
277 
[UDAY UMESH LAUT, J.] 
an.din Pawan Kumar. State of Haryana"and in Mo/tinder Singh and 
A 
Anr. v. State of Punjab and Others. 9 
20. In the circumstances we allow the present appeal, set aside 
the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below against the 
appellant and acquit him ofall the charges leveled against him. We further 
direct that the benefit of this acquittal and our decision will also enure to 
B 
the advantage of the non- appealing accused namely Sk. Sahid@Bablu. 
21. The appeal is thus allowed in afort:said terms. The appellant 
was released on bail during the pendency of this appeal. His Bail bonds 
sta!)d discharged. 
Devika Gujral 
• 2003 (11) sec 241 
9 2004(12)SCC311 
Appeal allowed. 
C 
,·. ".t:'