SHIV RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is preferred against the order dated 26-7-1989 passed by Sessions Judge, Dholpur by which the application of the petitioner for seeking test identification parade was dismissed

(2.) A First Information Report was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Kotwali, Dholpur and after completing the investigation, challan was submitted against nine persons including the petitioner. The petitioner contended before the learned Magistrate that his name has not been mentioned in the First Information Report and he was not with the persons who had committed this offence so the identification parade should be conducted for him. The police got the identification parade conducted with regard to other eight accused persons but the present petitioner was not put to test in that identification parade. That application was rejected by the learned Magistrate. The: petitioner was committed to the Court of SessionsT and there also he moved similar application which was rejected - by the SessionsT Judge vide order dated 26-7-1989.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that in the F.I.R. the name of the petitioner was not mentioned and he was not among those persons who had committed this offence. The petitioner is ready to take the risk of being his identified in the identification parade but as he is sure about this fact that he was not amongst those persons who had committed this offence, he insisted and requested the court that identification parade for him be also conducted. In support of this arguments he has relied on the case of Dargah & ors. v. State of Rajasthan1 and Madan Singh & ors. v. State of Rajasthan.2 This case was cited before the learned Sessions Judge also. The learned Public Prosecutor cited the case of Awadh Singh v. State.3 The learned Sessions Judge while relying on the case of Honble Supreme Court rejected the prayer of the petitioner.