JUDGMENT G.D. Dube, J. - This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Badaun convicting and sentencing each of the appellant to a term of 7 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 395 I.P.C. 2. Shiv Charan, P.W. 4, is a resident of village Majhaula, P.S. Rajpura, district Badaun. It is alleged that in the night between 22 and 23 July, 1977, he was sleeping outside his house. His daughter-in-law Shyam Kaur, P.W. 3, brother Ramphal, P.W. 6 and his wife Smt. Sharbato and other inmates of the house were sleeping inside the house. At about mid night the dacoits 10-11 in numbers came to the house of Shiv Charan and posing themselves as policemen, woke him and objected as to why he had kept his cot on the way. Thereupon Shiv Charan dragged his cot inside his house. Meanwhile the dacoits entered into his house opening the main door. They started looting properties. On the alarm of the inmates of the house Shiv Charan came out of the house and saw that one dacoit was roaming with a gun in the 'Gali' in front of main door of his house and two dacoits were standing on the roof with guns. The dacoits present in the 'Gali' threatened Shiv Charan to go back otherwise he will shoot him. Consequently he went in the village from the back side of the house of Ram Swaroop. He raised alarm there. Mewaram, Pyarelal, Ganga Pasi, Chandrapal, Mukut, Dungur and Kishan Lai arrived. They started raising alarm. Meanwhile Sukha, set afire bundles of 'Patel near the scene of occurrence'. It has been alleged that dacoits were seen in the light of this burning 'Patel'. They had recognised in all 10-11 dacoits committing dacoity. After looting the property the dacoits went away. Amongst the dacoits one was a known person named Shiyaram. Next morning Shiv Charan went to the police station Rajpura which was situated at a distance of 10 Km. from the place of occurrence. He sledged a report orally at 10.30 a.m. 2A. Babu Ram Dinkar, P.W. 10 had taken up investigation. He went to the spot and had inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan. He had taken the sample of ashes. He had interrogated the witnesses. from the place of occurrence. He sledged a report orally at 10.30 a.m. 2A. Babu Ram Dinkar, P.W. 10 had taken up investigation. He went to the spot and had inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan. He had taken the sample of ashes. He had interrogated the witnesses. Thereafter he went to the police station Behjoi for collecting clues about the dacoits. He had been informed by an informer that some miscreants having looted property and unlawful arms were sitting at Pathakpur railway hault. On that information along with police force he and public witnesses Shivdan Singh, Lalla Shah went to Pathakpur Railway hault and arrested lshwari, Sohan, Rajaram and Ramesh. On the search of appellant Ishwari a pistol, two cartridges, 'Lachhi' Ext. 1. 'Pahunchi' Ext. 2 Khaduwa 'Ext. 3 silver hair clips Ext. 4, 'Bala' Ext. 5 and 'Dhali' Ext. 7 were found in his bag Ext. 8. These articles were taken into possession and recovery memo Ext. 13 was prepared. After interrogation, today were made 'Baparda', and taken to the police station Bejoi district Moradabad and kept in the lockup at 7.30 p.m. same day. The articles recovered from their possession were kept in 'Malkhana' of the police station. This appellant alongwith other was sent to district Jail Moradabad on the next date. 3. On interrogation of the witnesses arrested at Pathakpur railway hault the complicity of Dharampal and others were found. The appellant Dharam Pal was arrested near district hospital and after making his Baparda he was taken to station and kept in the lock up in a Baparda condition. Next day this accused was taken from police station Kotwali and sent to District Jail Budaun in a veiled condition. 4. The identification of the property was conducted by S.P. Chauhan, Executive Magistrate on 12.9.1977. 'lachha' Ext. 3, 'pahunchi' Ext. 2, 'Khaduwa' Ext. 3. Silver hair clips Ext. 4 Bala' Ext. 5 were correctly identified by Shyam Kaur P.W.3. and Shiv Charan P.W. 4 and Others. Ishwari has put up for identification on 8.8.1977. Dharampal was put for identification on 18.10.77. After completing all the formalities the charge-sheet had been submitted against the two appellants and others. 5. The prosecution had examined/witnesses before the lower Court. The trial had proceeded against nine accused. 6. All of them had pleaded not guilty to the charge. They had not examined any witness in defence. Dharampal was put for identification on 18.10.77. After completing all the formalities the charge-sheet had been submitted against the two appellants and others. 5. The prosecution had examined/witnesses before the lower Court. The trial had proceeded against nine accused. 6. All of them had pleaded not guilty to the charge. They had not examined any witness in defence. The trial Court found only the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 386, I.P.C. and sentenced them, as stated above. 7. It was argued by learned counsel for the appellants that Ram Phal (P.W. 6) had admitted in his cross-examination that he Sheo Charan (P.W. 4) and other witnesses had gone to police-station on the next day of decoity and the police had shown the decoits to them. He also stated that the witnesses had gone to police-station Rajpura also. This witness had not been declared hostile by the prosecution. The lower, Court had relied upon the statement of this witness and had come to the conclusion that the identification proceedings against Ishwari accused are meaningless and cannot be relied upon. Consequently, the lower Court had rejected the identification evidence against Ishwari appellant. 8. However, the lower Court relied upon another part of the prosecution story which pertains recovery of looted material from the custody of Ishwari. The learned Sessions Judge observed that witness Ram Phal is a very innocent and simple villager. Since he had admitted frankly that the police had shown the dacoits to him and had denied that the looted articles were not shown to him, then this part of the prosecution story should be believed. This reasoning of the lower Court is not very sound. Since, the police had taken steps to show the arrested dacoits to the witnesses on the very next day of the dacoity, then it cannot be expected that the police would not have taken steps to show them the looted property allegedly recovered from Ishwari to the witnesses. Since the conduct of the police had become doubtful from the statement of Ram Phal, it is difficult to accept the contention of learned counsel for the state that the police had acted in a bona fide 'manner in dealing with the looted property. 9. The identification is a very week sort of evidence. Since the conduct of the police had become doubtful from the statement of Ram Phal, it is difficult to accept the contention of learned counsel for the state that the police had acted in a bona fide 'manner in dealing with the looted property. 9. The identification is a very week sort of evidence. If a doubt is created about the proceedings relating to identification and it transpires that the witnesses could have an occasion to see the property or the person between the dacoity and the identification, then no reliance can be placed on such an identification. Smt. Shyam Kaur (P.W. 3) had stated in her cross-examination that her father-in-law and other witnesses had told her that they had seen the looted property at the police-station. In view of this statement, no doubt is left that the witnesses had an occasion to see the looted property also between dacoity and the identification. The lower Court had erred on relying on the identification evidence relating to property. 10. The evidence against Dharampal was based only on identification by the witnesses in its Jail. It is worth noticing that his identification had taken place in the jail on 18.10.1977 after 50 days of the dacoity. It is true that the witnesses drawing that they had not mean this appellant at the police-station. They, however, admitted that after some time they had gone to police-station Rajpura. Since the police in this case was in the habit of showing the dacoits to the witnesses after their arrest, then they would have obviously followed the same procedure in this case of Dharampal. 11. The inordinate delay of 50 days in the identification also makes the identification evidence quite doubtful. It was not at all possible that after such a long gap the witnesses would have unable to remember the fairness of the dacoits. The first information report does not contain the description of any one of the dacoits. Keeping in view this condition. I am of the view that in this case the identification evidence cannot be relied upon. It is also noteable that nine person had been sent for identification. Sheo Charan, and Ganga Nesi. Kishna Lal had identified the appellants correctly. Out of them, Sheo Charan and Ganga Basi hai been presumed before the trial Court to prove the prosecution case. 12. It is also noteable that nine person had been sent for identification. Sheo Charan, and Ganga Nesi. Kishna Lal had identified the appellants correctly. Out of them, Sheo Charan and Ganga Basi hai been presumed before the trial Court to prove the prosecution case. 12. The statement of Ganga Wasi (P.W. 1) is also not very reliable. He had introduced the case that he had seen the dacoits in the light of torches also. There is a mention in the first information report that the witnesses had been recognised in the light of lantern and the light produced by burning Petrol. He had stated before the Investigating Officer that after hearing alarm of Sheo Charan, he came behind the houses of Doonger and Pooran. This distance has been shown in site plan Ext. Ke 14 at twenty one steps from the house of the victim of dacoity. The place, where the Patel was allegedly set a fire, has been shown 20 steps north of the house of Sheo Charan. In this way, this fire was burning at about 40 steps from the place where Ganga Wasi was standing. In such a situation, it was not at all probable for this witness Ganga Wasi to see the faces of the dacoits. At the most, he would have seen the dark side of the faces of the dacoits as he was standing towards north. This evidence alongwith probability that the witnesses would have sees the dacoits at police-station Rajpura makes the identification evidence against Dharampal appellant quite unreliable. 13. From the above discussions, I come to the conclusion that the learned Sessions Judge had erred in holding the appellants guilty of the offence punishable under Section 395, I.P.C. 14. In the result, the appeal -succeeds and is allowed. The judgment and order of the lower Court are set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the charge levelled against them. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties discharged.