Short Note : 1. This appeal is at the instance of Vishwanath who is represented by Shri A. Usmani Advocate. The other 7 appeals are at the instance of other co-accused persons, who have also been convicted by the judgment impugned for the offence punishable under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused appellant Tansingh, (Criminal appeal No. 954/76) has been convicted for the offence under section 397 of the Indian Penal Code also. Accused Tansingh has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years, whereas the other accused-appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years. Held : On behalf of the appellant Vishwanath, Shri Usmani, learned counsel, raised the following two contentions. Firstly, he urged that since the identification parade was held after about 20 days from the date of arrest, the same could not be relied for convicting the appellant. It is true that the test identification parade was held after about 20 days. The appellant Vishwanath along with other accused persons in other connected appeals, was arrested on 20th May 1975. The test identification parade was held on 12-6-1975. The investigating officer has tried to explain the delay by stating on oath that due to serious law and order situation, the police staff was badly busy in that respect with the result that arrangement to hold the test identification parade could not be made early. It is true that no details about the alleged situation raising the problem of law and order have been stated and the learned trial Judge has also wrongly observed that during emergency, the situation could be presumed to be such inasmuch as there was no question of emergency during the relevant period, i.e. before 26-6-1975. But there is nothing on record to infer even the probability of any prejudice having been caused to the accused persons. There is nothing to suggest that the witnesses, who had ultimately identified the accused persons in the test identification parade, had any occasion to see the appellants before hand. There is positive evidence on record that the accused persons, whenever they were required to be taken out, were kept Ba Parda faces duly covered. 2. There is nothing to suggest that the witnesses, who had ultimately identified the accused persons in the test identification parade, had any occasion to see the appellants before hand. There is positive evidence on record that the accused persons, whenever they were required to be taken out, were kept Ba Parda faces duly covered. 2. Even otherwise, it is not a case where the conviction of the appellants rests only on their identification by the prosecution witnesses, but there is sufficient evidence of recovery of the looted properties, discovered at the instance of the appellants and the respective items so recovered had been properly identified by the witnesses not only in the Court, but also in the test identification parade to be the stolen property. Utensils recovered on the memorandum of the appellant Vishwanath were duly identified by the witnesses and their testimony does inspire confidence. More or less, similar is the situation in respect of the other appellants also. They have been identified in the test identification parade and before the Court also. Further, there is evidence in the shape of recovery of stolen property in pursuance of the information given by them as contained in the respective memoranda and the seized properties had been duly identified by the prosecution witnesses. Appeal partly allowed. Sentence reduced.