Test Identification Parade
Test Identification Parade (TIP) Explained
What is a Test Identification Parade?
A Test Identification Parade (TIP) is a process used by the police or investigating authorities in criminal cases to identify the accused person by witnesses or victims. It involves showing a group of persons, including the accused, to the witness who is asked to identify if the accused was involved in the crime.
The purpose is to assist in the fair and reliable identification of the accused to avoid wrongful accusations.
Legal Basis and Importance of TIP
TIP is not a substantive evidence in itself but a corroborative piece of evidence.
It is crucial because identification of the accused by the eyewitness plays a key role in criminal trials.
A TIP is conducted to eliminate the possibility of mistaken identity.
The procedure is governed by principles of fairness, ensuring the accused is not singled out or unduly influenced.
Procedure of TIP
Composition of the Parade:
A group of persons (usually 6 to 8), including the accused and others resembling the accused in appearance, are arranged.
Conducted by Police:
The police present the group before the witness or victim.
Identification by Witness:
The witness is asked if they can identify the accused among the group.
Record:
The parade is recorded in writing, and the witness’s statement during the TIP is noted.
Voluntariness:
Participation of the accused in TIP is generally voluntary unless under lawful custody.
Significance in Trial
TIP evidence helps the court to assess the reliability of witness identification.
If a witness fails to identify the accused during TIP but identifies the accused in court, it raises doubts about the accuracy of the identification.
Similarly, if the TIP was improperly conducted, it may be excluded or treated with caution.
Case Laws on TIP
1. Ram Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1952 SC 332)
The Supreme Court observed that identification by a witness is very important and that TIP is one of the safest methods to establish identity.
The court held that the testimony of a witness who identifies the accused during a TIP carries great weight.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Kanhaiya (AIR 1968 SC 75)
The Supreme Court held that the failure of the witness to identify the accused during TIP does not necessarily mean the witness is not telling the truth.
The court emphasized that the entire evidence has to be examined in the light of circumstances.
3. Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1967 SC 944)
The court stated that TIP evidence is not substantive evidence but corroborative.
It is not mandatory to conduct a TIP for every case.
Even if TIP is not held, conviction can be based on other credible evidence.
4. Dattu Ramrao Mane v. State of Maharashtra (2016) 10 SCC 306
The Supreme Court emphasized proper procedure during TIP to avoid unfair prejudice.
Identifications made under unfair circumstances or with suggestive methods may be thrown out.
5. Shivaji Sahebrao Bobde v. State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCC 793
The court observed that in cases involving eyewitness identification, the credibility of TIP is important.
The absence of a TIP or irregularities in TIP does not necessarily render the prosecution case unsustainable if other evidence is credible.
Points to Note
TIP must be conducted in a non-suggestive manner.
Witnesses should not be influenced or prompted.
Persons in the parade should resemble the accused to avoid unfairness.
A TIP is especially important in cases relying heavily on visual identification.
Summary
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Purpose | To help witnesses identify the accused accurately |
| Legal Status | Corroborative evidence, not substantive |
| Procedure | Group parade including accused and similar-looking persons |
| Importance in Court | Supports reliability of witness identification |
| Consequences of Failure | Does not automatically invalidate evidence or acquittal |
| Key Requirements | Fair procedure, non-suggestive, proper documentation |
RELATED Blog
0 comments