Test Identification parade Not Mandatory When Dock Identification Suffices, Says J&K HC

Srinagar: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh held that Test Identification Parade (TIP) is not necessary in cases where Trial Court has enough confidence on the evidence of dock identification.

The court emphasised that although a TIP can be a helpful investigative tool, the decisive and substantive evidence of identity is the witness’s dock identification made during trial.

In a ruling delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri, the court noted that TIPs operate as a matter of prudence to reinforce in-court testimony, but are not an indispensable prerequisite. 

“Where circumstances justify it, courts may confidently base their conclusions on dock identification alone,” Court observed.

The Court made these remarks while deciding a petition stemming from a criminal case in which the accused contested the trial court’s reliance on dock identification without first conducting a formal Test Identification Parade. 

The petitioners contended that a TIP is essential whenever witnesses are unfamiliar with the accused, and that the failure to hold one, undermines the prosecution’s case. 

Court while hearing the appeal for challenge held  that  “Test Identification Parade is a corroborative piece of evidence, whereas evidence of dock identification is substantive evidence. 

Court said that the fact which establishes the identity of an accused is relevant under Section 9 of the Evidence Act. “As such, as a general rule, the substantive evidence of a witness is the statement made in the court.” 

It was further noted by the court that  “In appropriate cases, the trial court can accept the evidence of dock identification, without insisting upon a Test Identification Parade.” 

The Court said that the petitioners had failed to demonstrate that the witness’s in-court identification was inherently doubtful or that the absence of a TIP had caused prejudice. “There is nothing on record for that matter,” the court noted.

The Bench upheld the trial court judgment and dismissed the appeal. 

The court said there is no need for interference in the instant case in hand as we don’t find any illegality in the judgement passed by the trial court.

The case traces back to the FIR 59 of 2011 whereas one Arvind Verma conspired and killed her own wife for another woman.The Trial Court of Reasi in a 2018 judgment convicted the accused for life imprisonment for murder charges.