DHANAJI PATLOBA DADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for suspension of sentence pending the appeal, wherein by judgment and order dtd. 5/4/2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, the applicant has been convicted and sentenced of the offences punishable under Sec. 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with a fine of Rs.1,000.00 in default, imprisonment for one month. He has also been convicted of the offences punishable under Ss. 489-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00, in default imprisonment of one month.

(2.) At the outset, Mr. Aniket Nikam, learned Counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the fact that the only evidence available is the Test Identification Parade (for short "T.I. parade"), which in itself is full of discrepancies and only on the sole basis of the same, the applicant could not have been convicted by the trial Court.

(3.) The evidence of PW-8 - Vijay Lokare, Naib Tahasildar, who conducted the T.I. parade, has unequivocally admitted in cross- examination that he had not given any written notice to the dummies to remain present at the time of T.I. parade. He had not accepted any identification proof at the time of T.I. parade. The dummies have not put their signatures on the memorandum. There is no description of the dummies in the memorandum. There is no documentary evidence to show that those dummies were present at the time of T.I. parade. He further admits that three of the dummies were not nearby of the age of accused. There is no description of the clothes of the dummies which were on their person at the time of conducting the T.I. parade. It is also admitted by this witness that there is no mention whether the dummies had beard and having long hair. There is no letter issued to the panch witnesses to remain present for T.I. parade.