Contradictions In Eyewitness Accounts And Suppression Of Crucial Evidence Weaken The Prosecution's Case: Telangana High Court High Court of Sikkim Sets Aside Trial Court’s Decision on Maintainability of Suit: Preliminary Issues Must Be Purely of Law Courts Must Focus on Substance Over Procedure, Says High Court Writ Petitions Against Civil Court Orders Must Be Under Article 227: Patna High Court Reiterates Jurisdictional Boundaries Kerala High Court Upholds Eviction, Rejects Sub-Tenant's Kudikidappu Claim Contractual Employment Does Not Confer Right to Regularization: Jharkhand High Court Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act for Past Domestic Violence: Bombay High Court Tenants Cannot Prescribe How Landlords Utilize Their Property: Delhi High Court Validates Eviction Labour Commissioner to Decide Petitioner’s Date of Birth Claim within Three Months, Ensuring Proper Verification and Consideration of Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Concealment of Health Condition and False Allegations Amount to Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Possession Implies Constructive Notice: Duty to Inquire Rests on Subsequent Purchasers: Supreme Court Clarifies Bona Fide Purchase Standards Judicial Proceedings Cannot Be Instituted After Four Years: MP High Court in Quashing FIR Against Retired Engineer Orissa High Court Invalidates Lecturer Recruitment Advertisements for Non-Compliance with UGC Standards Public Interest Jurisdiction Not a Substitute for Private Litigation: Karnataka High Court Declines PIL Cognizance under Section 188 IPC is illegal without a public servant’s complaint:Kerala High Court Juvenile Justice Act Prevails Over Recruitment Rules: Madras High Court Rules Juvenile Records Cannot Bar Employment in Police Services" Calcutta High Court Quashes MR Distributorship Selection Due to Irregularities in Godown Compliance and Selection Process Once the driver has established the validity of his license, the insurer cannot escape liability without conclusive proof to the contrary: J&K HC Belated Claims Cannot Be Entertained: Kerala High Court Overturns CAT Decision on Date of Birth Correction DNA Tests Cannot Supersede Established Legal Presumptions: Himachal Pradesh HC Section 26E of SARFAESI Act Overrides VAT Act: Secured Creditor's Charge Has Priority Over State's Tax Dues: Gujrat High Court High Court of Delhi Clarifies Jurisdiction in Commercial Dispute: 'Procedural Efficiency Must Be Upheld Power Under Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Exercised Without Prima Facie Case Beyond Contradictions: Supreme Court Motive Alone Insufficient for Conviction Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Supreme Court Ensures Equal Financial Benefits for All High Court Judges: Discrimination Based on Recruitment Source Struck Down Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Four Accused: Cites Contradictory Dying Declarations and Lack of Independent Evidence in Murder Case Evidence Corroborates Violent Robbery and Recovery of Stolen Articles: Calcutta High Court Upholds Conviction in Burrabazar Dacoity Case Failure to Implead Contesting Candidates is Fatal; Fundamental Defect Cannot Be Cured: Bombay High Court Dismisses Election Petition Magistrate Not Functus Officio Post-Final Order in Maintenance Cases: Allahabad High Court Substantial Questions of Law a Must in Second Appeals, Reiterates Andhra Pradesh High Court Inconsistencies and Procedural Lapses: Allahabad High Court Acquits Four in Neeta Singh Murder Case

No Grounds to Disbelieve Test Identification Parade" – High Court Upholds Conviction in Bicycle Theft Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu dismissed the Criminal Revision Case No. 850 of 2009, upholding the conviction of the petitioners under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for bicycle theft. The court found no merit in the petitioners' challenge against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.133 of 2005, confirming their conviction and sentence.

The legal point in focus was the petitioners' challenge to their conviction under Section 411 IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property, specifically bicycles. The contention revolved around the conduct and validity of the Test Identification Parade and whether the procedures followed were in line with the law.

The case stemmed from multiple incidents of bicycle thefts in Proddatur. Following their arrest, the petitioners (A.1 and A.2) were found in possession of the stolen bicycles, which were identified by the original owners in a Test Identification Parade. The issue raised was whether the Test Identification Parade was conducted lawfully and whether the evidence presented was credible and sufficient for conviction.

The court meticulously assessed the testimony of witnesses (PW1 to PW6), who confirmed the theft of their bicycles. PW7, who conducted the Test Identification Parade, and PW10, the investigating officer, provided substantial evidence supporting the prosecution's case. Despite one mediator turning hostile (PW8), another mediator (PW9) corroborated the prosecution's case.

The court noted, "It is very difficult to accept such a contention [regarding the conduct of Test Identification Parade]," emphasizing the credibility of the parade and the lack of valid reasons to disbelieve the procedure followed. The court affirmed that both the trial court and the appellate court correctly appreciated the evidence on record.

The High Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Case No. 850 of 2009, confirming the judgment dated 13.05.2009 in Criminal Appeal No.133 of 2005. The petitioners' conviction under Section 411 IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property (bicycles) was upheld.

Date of Decision: 1st March 2024.

Diyā Chandrayudu & Another v. State of A.P.

 

Similar News