First-Time Dock Identification in the Absence of TIP and Corroborating Evidence Warrants Acquittal

On February 21, 2021, the complainant’s family was at Marhi Mata Temple for a picnic. A scuffle broke out with 7–8 individuals (the appellants) following an objection to their abusive language

During the assault involving wooden sticks and an iron cooking implement (Kevcha), Karan Ratre died and others were injured

The Trial Court (Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur) convicted the six appellants under Sections 147, 148, and 302/149 of the IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment

The appellants challenged the conviction on the grounds of misidentification and lack of forensic evidence

1. Whether the death of the deceased, Karan Ratre, was homicidal in nature

2. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants were the actual assailants

The court applied Section 302 of the IPC (Punishment for Murder) read with Section 149 (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object)

It also considered Section 147 (Punishment for Rioting) and Section 148 (Rioting, armed with deadly weapon)

Procedurally, the court relied on the evidentiary value of Test Identification Parades (TIP) and the standard of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" required for conviction in criminal jurisprudence

It finally mandated compliance with Section 437-A CrPC (now Section 481 BNSS) regarding bail bonds pending potential higher court appeals

The court affirmed the homicidal nature of the death based on the post-mortem report (Exhibit P/1) showing internal brain hemorrhage

Notably, the complainant and two injured eyewitnesses (PW-6 and PW-7) turned hostile and failed to identify the accused in court

While PW-5 (Rekha Samundre) identified the appellants in court, she was not part of the TIP, and her first-time identification in court without previously knowing the accused was deemed unreliable

Furthermore, there was no specific attribution of overt acts to individual appellants

The recovery of weapons was deemed inconsequential as there was no FSL report confirming the presence of human blood, and no doctor's query report linked the weapons to the specific injuries sustained

The Court answered the first issue in the affirmative (homicidal death) but the second issue in the negative (identity not proven)

Consequently, the High Court set aside the judgment dated September 29, 2025, acquitted all appellants of the charges, and ordered their immediate release. The appellants were directed to furnish personal bonds under Section 437-A CrPC to remain effective for six months in case of a further appeal to the Supreme Court