Short Note : Sections 417, 418 and 423 of the Code give to the High Court full power to review at large the evidence upon which the order of acquittal was founded, and to reach the conclusion that upon that evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be placed upon that power, unless it be found expressly stated in the Code. But in exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusion upon facts, the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (i) the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses, (ii) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial, (iii) the right of the accused to the benefit any doubt and (iv) the slowness of an appellate Court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses. Sheoswarup v. King Emperor, AIR 1934 PC 227 , relied on. 2. The prosecution case mainly depends on identification of the dacoit by the eye-witnesses. As a general rule, the identification of accused in Court for the first time requires some corroboration by way of previous identification in the parade or some other circumstantial evidence. However, there may be exception to this general rule when for example, the Court is impressed by a particular witness on whose testimony it can safely rely without such or other corroboration. This will depend upon the power of observation of the witness, the opportunity available to him to observe them, the time-lag and other circumstances. The identification parades are therefore, held with the primary object of enabling the witnesses to identify persons concerned in the offence who are not previously known to them in order to satisfy the Investigating Officers that the investigation is proceeding in the proper line. The parades are also held in order to corroborate the identification of the accused persons in the clock. The parades are also held in order to corroborate the identification of the accused persons in the clock. There can be no doubt that such parades are held at the earliest opportunity in order to minimize the chances of memories of the identification witnesses fading away by lapse of time but it is not a proposition of law that after a lapse of a long period, witnesses would, in no case, be able to identify the dacoits they had seen in the course of a dacoity committed during the night. Delhi Administration v. Balkrishna, AIR 1972 SC 3 , Boleshwar Rai v. State of Bihar, (1963) 2 SCR 433, S.T. Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1974 SC 791 , Bharat Singh v. State of U.P. AIR 1972 SC 2478 , relied on. 3. There are cases which go to show that for the purpose of disposal of property even the police statement or any confession of the accused recorded by police can be used as evidence against him because such document is not being used against the accused in any enquiry or trial. Disposal of property is a separate proceeding at the conclusion of the enquiry or trial. Queen Empress v. Inrivuvan, 9 Bombay 131, Polu v. Emperor, AIR 1943 Lahore 312, Prakash v. Jagdish, 1957 JLJ 951, relied on. Appeal partly allowed.