ORDER K.N. Srivastava, J. - This is an appeal against the judgment and order passed by Sri P.N. Goel, Addl. Sessions Judge, Etawah convicting Ram Lakhan, Babu Ram and Raja Ram Appellants under two counts of Section 395 IPC and sentencing each of them to eight years' RI under each count. 2. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as follows: In the night between 12th and 13th October, 1966 dacoities were committed at the houses of Kali Charan, Lajja Ram and Kalka Ram. All these three persons were residents of village Indrosi police station Bakewar district Etawah. The dacoits were 12 or 13 in number and were armed with fire arms. They entered the house of Kali Charan. They assaulted Kali Charan, Shrimati Ramshri, Rajendra Prasad and Lajja Ram. During the course of the dacoity at the house of Kali Charan, they also committed dacoities at the houses of Lajja Ram and Kalka Ram. All these three dacoities were committed during the course of the same transaction. A lantern was burning in the verandah of Kali Charan. Another lantern was burning in the chapper of Itwari Lal. On the alarm raised by victims of the dacoities, certain witnesses reached there. Some of them had torches and they flashed their torches during the course of the dacoity. Hukum Singh (PW 7) set fire to a heap of Toni at the Chabutra of Sheo Narain which caused much light. In the above light some of the dacoits who were known to the witnesses from before the occurrence were recognised. The faces and features of the other dacoits were also recognised. After committing the dacoities, the dacoits ran away. 3. A report of the occurrence was lodged by Kali Charan at police station Bakewar next day at 6.20 a.m. In this report, four dacoits were named. On the basis of this report, the police registered a case u/s 395 read with Section 397 IPC against the four named persons and ten or eleven unknown dacoits. 4. The police started investigation. During the course of investigation, these Appellants were arrested on different dates and certain other suspects were also arrested and from the possession of some of them looted articles were recovered. The investigating officer made a report for the test identification of the disputed property and the suspects. 4. The police started investigation. During the course of investigation, these Appellants were arrested on different dates and certain other suspects were also arrested and from the possession of some of them looted articles were recovered. The investigating officer made a report for the test identification of the disputed property and the suspects. After receipt of the result of the test identification, the Appellants and certain other persons were chalanned. The Appellants were convicted and sentenced as stated above while their co-accused were acquitted. 5. The main ground on which the judgment of the trial court was assailed by the learned Counsel for the Appellants was that the test identification of the Appellants was not conducted in jail with due formality. The test identification of the Appellants along with certain other persons was conducted in District Jail by Shri Ata Mobammad Shola on 8-11-1966. The result of the test identification was noted down in the test identification memo. The test identification of Nathoo Ram, Asha Ram, Dewari Lal and Vijai Bahadur were also conducted along with the Appellants the same day. A separate parade was held for the Appellants and the aforesaid four persons. Shri Shola stated that seven under-trials were mixed with each of the suspects and a separate parade was held for each suspect. 6. The learned Counsel for the Appellants contended that the learned Magistrate was wrong in mixing only seven under-trials with each of the suspects and as such the test identification parade was not worthy of credence. A number of decisions of this Court were quoted before the trial Judge. The trial Judge held that at least ten under-trials should be mixed with each suspect. He observed that the decision did not lay down the principle that if a lesser number of under-trials were mixed with the suspects, the test identification parade was not worthy of credence. 7. The first case which was cited by the learned Counsel for the Appellants in this case is Satya Narain v. State 1953 CrLJ 848 . It was held that the identification proceeding of each suspect should be held separately and with each suspect as large number of innocent men should be mixed as possible, but in no case not less than nine or ten. Similar observation was made in the case of Asharfi v. State 1961 CrLJ 340 : 1960 AWR 440 . It was held that the identification proceeding of each suspect should be held separately and with each suspect as large number of innocent men should be mixed as possible, but in no case not less than nine or ten. Similar observation was made in the case of Asharfi v. State 1961 CrLJ 340 : 1960 AWR 440 . It was emphasized in this case that at least ten innocent persons must be mixed with each of the suspects. In Kalloo v. State 1965 ALJ 197, it was insisted that at least ten persons similar in appearance, built and height be mixed with each suspect in his parade. 8. It is true that in similar cases, the result of the test identification was relied upon even when seven under-trials had been mixed with the suspect but those cases stand on almost different footing. In those cases, the conduct of the investigating agency was above board and there was nothing on the record to show that the police or the investigating agency had falsely roped in anyone. In the present case, there is definite evidence that the conduct of the investigating officer in invetigating this case was not above board. While dealing with this aspect of the case, the trial court observed as below: Taking into account the distance of the village of occurrence from the police station, the distance of the police station from Etawah and the fact that Diwari Lal was picked up by as many as eleven witnesses, I am of the opinion that there can be substance in the allegation of Diwari Lal that he was shown to the witnesses at the police station. He has further stated that the witnesses came with him upto Etawah. It is possible that Diwari Lal may have been sent to Etawah at about 10 a.m. just as Babu Ram, Ram Lakhan and Raja Ram were sent only three days before and the entry of departure may have been ante-timed. Further on, the trial Court observed as below: It is, therefore, possible that the police may be interested in implicating him in some more cases. The police station Bharthana is about seven miles from the police station Bakewar. It is, therefore, likely Vijai Bahadur may have been implicated in this case by the police of Bharthana and Bakewar. Further on, the trial Court observed as below: It is, therefore, possible that the police may be interested in implicating him in some more cases. The police station Bharthana is about seven miles from the police station Bakewar. It is, therefore, likely Vijai Bahadur may have been implicated in this case by the police of Bharthana and Bakewar. Further on, while dealing with the case of Vijai Bahadur accused, the trial court observed as below: From the above telegram, it appears that the accused was arrested on 14-10-1966 in day time and in any case much earlier than 7.30 p.m. the time of arrest shown by the prosecution. Further on while dealing with the case of Vijai Bahadur, the trial court again observed: Giving careful consideration to the various points urged on behalf of Vijai Bahadur, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in the contention that he has been falsely roped in this case and that Zanani Dhoties (Exs. 4 to 6) were not recovered from his possession. It is, therefore, possible that he may have been shown to the witnesses on Indrosi. 9. This observation by the trial court left no room for doubt that at least the investigating officer falsely implicated Vijai Bahadur and in order to show that he was one of the dacoits planted certain Zanani Dhotis on his person. It is also clear that Diwari Lal one of the suspects was shown to the witnesses and was sent to Etawah by the same bus in which some of the witnesses were travelling. If the investigating officer could falsely implicate some of the arrested persons and could procure evidence to secure their conviction, there was no guarantee that the investigating officer was fair to the Appellants. 10. This being the state of affairs, a court of justice must insist that the instructions given by courts from time to time regarding the conduct of the test identification must be strictly and carefully followed so that the possibility of innocent persons being convicted and sentenced is eliminated. The learned Magistrate who conducted the test identification in this case did not even comply with the instructions which are contained in Manual of Government Orders about the conduct of the test identification. The learned Magistrate who conducted the test identification in this case did not even comply with the instructions which are contained in Manual of Government Orders about the conduct of the test identification. In order to eliminate the possibility of innocent persons from being prosecuted and convicted, the law courts have always insisted that a larger number of persons should be mixed in the test identification parade but the number should not be so large as to create confusion in the mind of the identifying witnesses. Taking into consideration the interest of the prosecution as well as defence this Court has in a number of cases held that ten under-trials should be mixed with each of the suspects and a separate parade be held for each of the suspects. No reason has been given as to why only seven under trials were mixed with each of the accused. 11. As shown above, the conduct of the investigating officer was not above board. The learned trial court observed that it was not laid down in these decisions that mixing of under-trials less than ten in number render the test identification valueless. I do not agree with this observation of the trial court. In this case, where the investigation was not properly done, the trial court should not have relied on the test identification where less than ten under-trials were mixed with each of the Appellants in his respective parade. 12. For the reasons given above, I am, therefore, of the opinion that the result of the test identification against the Appellants cannot be used as a corroborative piece of evidence against them. It is well known fact that identification evidence in itself is a weak kind of evidence and it cannot be acted upon unless it is corroborated. There is no corroboration of the identification evidence of the witnesses against the Appellants and therefore, it would not be safe to act upon their identification evidence and to hold that the Appellants were among the dacoits who committed the aforesaid dacoities that night. 13. In the result, the appeal succeeds. The appeal is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed upon the Appellants is set aside. The Appellants are acquitted. They are on bail. They need not surrender to their bail bonds which shall stand cancelled.