SULTAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Applicant was convicted. Under Sec. 392 IPC and was sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. His appeal was also dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Aligarh; hence this revision.

(2.) The Applicant was not known to the eye witnesses and the case wholly depended on the result of the identification proceedings held in the case. Apart from the Applicant one other accused was also subjected to the test identification. Only three witnesses were brought to identify the two accused. Debi Das and Kedar Singh identified one man correctly and each of them committed one mistake. However Ram Khilari identified both the accused correctly. The learned Sessions Judge was of the opinion that the result of the identification, being one correct without any error and the other two being 50 per cent correct and 50 per cent incorrect, was sufficient to entail the conviction of the Applicant. I am afraid the view taken by the Sessions Judge cannot form a satisfactory basis for conviction of the Applicant.

(3.) Applying the principle of the above ruling to the present case the testimony of PWs Devi Dass and Kedar Singh cannot be considered to be good against the Applicant. It would also not be safe to maintain the conviction of the Applicant on the solitary evidence of PW Ram Khilari, though he could be considered as good witness against him.