JUDGMENT K.S. Garewal, J. - This appeal against acquittal has been filed by the State of Haryana to challenge the acquittal of Balvinder Singh, Mohan Singh and Shokat Ali by the leaned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad who vide judgment dated December 17, 1990 had acquitted the accused of the charge under Section 395/397 Indian Penal Code 2. The brief facts of the case are that on July 7, 1989 three employees of Kelvinator namely Suresh Kumar Cashier (PW 5), Sher Singh (PW 1) and Des Raj driver (PW 6) had gone to the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Faridabad and collected cash amount of Rs. 4.10 lacs and were returning to the company premises in a car DAQ 6798 carrying the cash. The amount was in two attache cases, one contained Rs. 1.10 lacs and the other contained Rs. 3.00 lacs. When their car, driven by Des Raj, had reached the premises of M/s Zenith Sewing Machine, its path was intercepted by Fiat car HYU 252. The car carrying Suresh and others stopped. From the intercepting car, three men came out, one of them fired a shot with a revolver at the driver shattering the window panes. That person also removed the ignition key of the car. Two others opened the rear doors of the car and snatched the two attache cases from Sher Singh and Suresh Kumar. After robbing the cash the robbers escaped in HYU 252. 3. Matter was reported to the police by Sher Singh (PW 1) and case was registered. Thereafter, investigation was conducted. Des Raj was medico- legally examined and treated for his injuries. The damaged car was also taken into possession and a bullet was taken out from the body of the car by the Scientific Officer attached to the Crime Branch. A wheel cap of the car used by the robbers was also recovered from the spot. However, the police has not clue about the identity of the robbers. 4. It was only on the night intervening July 27/28, 1989 that two of the accused namely Balvinder Singh and Mohan Singh were arrested by the Roshanara Road police of Delhi from a park in Kamla Nagar, Delhi. A country made pistol and some cartridges were recovered from the possession of Balvinder Singh and a knife from the possession of Mohan Singh for which they were separately prosecuted. A country made pistol and some cartridges were recovered from the possession of Balvinder Singh and a knife from the possession of Mohan Singh for which they were separately prosecuted. On the basis of Balvinder Singhs interrogation, the investigating officer recovered Rs. 70,000/- in cash from Balvinder Singhs house in Tilak Nagar, New Delhi on the following day. However, Balvinder Singh also got car DLT 5947 recovered, which he had purchased for Rs. 27,000/- from out of the amount of his share of the robbed money. Similarly, Mohan Singh on interrogation led the police party to his house and got Rs. 30,000/- recovered from there. Balvinder Singh and Mohan Singh were transferred from Delhi to Faridabad police and were produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad on July 28, 1989. The Faridabad police arranged a test identification parade but the accused refused to participate in the proposed parade. Shokat Ali was arrested from his house in village Dhamada District Bulandshehar (U.P.) on August 1, 1989 and in the course of the search of his house of Rs. 70,000/- along with an attache case Ex.P1 was recovered. The cash amount was in seven bundles and bore slips of Oriental Bank of Commerce. Sheokat Ali was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad on August 2, 1989 and he too declined to participate in the identification parade. On the basis of his interrogation on August 8 a country made pistol was recovered from his possession which he had got concealed in Khitwari. 5. The investigating officer had managed to recover 17 packets each containing Rs. 10,000/- in currency notes of Rs. 100/- and each packet bore slip of Oriental Bank of Commerce and were so identified by Suresh Kumar Cashier (PW 5). The accused were sent up for trial. At the trial charge was framed against them under Section 395/397 Indian Penal Code to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad discussed the evidence regarding the identification link which the prosecution had tried to establish and also the evidence of recovery of the robbed money but came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove the case. 6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad discussed the evidence regarding the identification link which the prosecution had tried to establish and also the evidence of recovery of the robbed money but came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove the case. 6. The learned counsel for the State has submitted that in fact the recovery of the cash along with a brief case established that it was the respondents who had committed the robbery since the bundle of notes bore slips of the bank from where the money had been withdrawn and had been so identified by Suresh Kumar Cashier (PW 5) and J.K. Chopra Bank Manager (PW 9). The recovered brief case was also identified as being the one in which the cash was carried when it was robbed. The refusal of the respondents to participate in the identification parade had also been highlighted. 7. Identification in Court in this case is not at all satisfactory because the description of the robbers had not been mentioned by the complainant in the F.I.R. The investigating officer should have closely examined the first informant and included the description in the F.I.R. itself. Basic information like age, complexion, height and language spoken are useful to note during the police investigation if the police was to apprehend the robbers and successfully prosecute them. Whether any of them was sporting a beard, wearing spectacles or had some other unusual features are also some of the clues which could have lead to the identity of the culprits. There is also no record of the identity of the car used by the robbers even though the number of case had been disclosed in the FIR. It is possible that the number was a fake one but even so the investigating officer should have conducted some investigation in this aspect of the case and if he had done so he may well have chanced upon some useful clues about the car and possibly about the identity of the robbers. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had observed in the judgment that two of the accused were Sikhs by faith and had beard, long hair and tied turbans, the third was Muslim by faith who also had a beard. According to the prosecution, the robbers were clean shaven, therefore, if the accused had beards they were not the robbers which the police had been looking for. According to the prosecution, the robbers were clean shaven, therefore, if the accused had beards they were not the robbers which the police had been looking for. There appears to be a basic fallacy in this argument because what had to be really seen is whether the accused had beards of sufficient length which could not have grown in three weeks in the case of Balvinder Singh and Mohan Singh and four weeks in the case of Shokat Ali; the time between the occurrence and their respective arrests. If the police officer who has arrested these accused had not made a note of their respective beards, then atleast the Magistrate before whom they were produced ought to have recorded a note to this effect. It is not good enough to say that at the trial the accused had beards, therefore, the accused were not the persons who had committed the occurrence since at the time of the occurrence the accused were clean shaven and had grown beards to conceal their identity. What could have been crucial for the prosecution is the length of beard or the extent of facial hair on their respective faces at the time of their appearance. There is no such evidence forthcoming. Therefore, the argument of the State that the accused had grown their beards after the occurrence in order to conceal their identify is not valid. 8. It is true that on the date of the occurrence the three employees of the company had withdrawn withdrawn Rs. 4.10 lacs in cash and had put this amount into attache cases. Out of the robbed amount Rs. 1.70 lacs and a attache cash had been recovered but the link between the robbery and the recovery does not appear to be a very strong one. To identify the cash as being part of the robbed amount by the slips of the concerned bank is not a satisfactory method of linking the identity of the cash. Such slips could have been placed or pasted at any time by the police. Moreover, the witnesses had been saying that the robbed amount was in currency notes of Rs. 100/- and they were packets of Rs. 100/- notes each or even that the packets contained the name of the bank concerned. Furthermore, the attache case is not of any specific make or type. Moreover, the witnesses had been saying that the robbed amount was in currency notes of Rs. 100/- and they were packets of Rs. 100/- notes each or even that the packets contained the name of the bank concerned. Furthermore, the attache case is not of any specific make or type. The witnesses could well have told the police that they were carrying the cash in a VIP for Safari make of attache case of black or grey colour but they did not do such thing. It was the duty of the police Investigators to get all these details from the witnesses when their statements were recorded but they neither got the details of the identities of the robbers nor details or the manner in which the cash had been put in the attache cases or even the details of the attache cases itself. This was crucial evidence which could have provided a direct link with the robbers in case of the arrest of the real culprits and recovery of some of the amount and either one or both of the attache cases. 9. One cannot help noticing that often police investigators leave some details a bit vague in order to fit in the details later after they have nailed the accused. In contemporary times this practice does not pay although earlier the police had been adopting such methods. Nowadays the Investigators must get precise information from the victims of an offence if they are to catch the perpetrators thereof and not leave matters in a vague or indefinite state. The Investigators also do not appears to have made any effort to connect evidence of the cash used in the robbery. 10. The trial court had taken the correct view after appreciating the evidence and concluding that the prosecution had not established the case against the respondents. The view was neither unreasonable nor perverse. Therefore, I find not merit in this appeal against acquittal and the same is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.