Flaws in Test Identification Parade and material contradictions in witness testimony necessitate acquittal in robbery cases.

On April 20, 2004, the complainant (P.W. 1), an employee of M/s. Laxmi Stores, was allegedly robbed of a bag containing Rs. 6,30,000/- and documents while en route to his employer’s residence

The FIR was registered against unknown persons. During the investigation, five persons were arrested

Rs. 5,30,000/- was recovered from Deepak Kejriwal (Appellant in CRA 16/2007)

The complainant identified the appellants in a Test Identification (T.I.) Parade held 23 days after the incident

The Trial Court convicted the appellants under Section 392 IPC (Robbery), sentencing them to 5 years of imprisonment, while acquitting them of Section 397 IPC

During the pendency of the appeal, Appellant Deepak Kejriwal died

1. Whether the identification of the appellants in the T.I. Parade was legally valid given the delay and allegations of prior exposure to the witness

2. Whether the prosecution proved the involvement of Sk. Nawsad Ali and others beyond reasonable doubt in light of inconsistencies regarding the number of offenders and lack of recoveries

3. Whether the appeal of Deepak Kejriwal survives following his death

Section 392 of the IPC regarding the punishment for robbery

Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act concerning the relevancy of facts for identification

The doctrine that T.I. Parade is for corroboration and is not substantive evidence as established in Budhsen v. State of UP

The principle that unexplained delay in holding a T.I. Parade (e.g., 15 days) can vitiate its evidentiary value as held in Sheikh Hasib alias Tabarak v. State of Bihar

The rule regarding the unreliability of witnesses when there is an unjustified delay in recording their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as per Balakrishna Swain v. State of Orissa

The Court found the case against the surviving appellants (CRA 375/2006) weak because the T.I. Parade was held after a significant delay of 23 days without explanation

The Magistrate (P.W. 8) recorded that suspects claimed they were shown to the witness at the police station lock-up before the parade, creating "serious doubts" about the identification’s integrity

There were "glaring inconsistencies" in the number of dacoits—varying from 3 to 6 across different depositions

No money or incriminating articles were recovered from the surviving appellants, unlike the deceased accused Deepak

The delay in sending the FIR to the Magistrate (2 days) violated the 24-hour mandate of Section 157 Cr.P.C.

The Court noted that the Trial Court had already acquitted a co-accused (Anarul) on similar grounds of a defective T.I. Parade, yet inconsistently convicted the present appellants

CRA 16 of 2007 was dismissed as abated due to the death of the appellant