Judgment Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.—The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 29 August, 1997 rendered by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Baran whereby, he acquitted the accusedrespondents namely Thakur Lal and Phool Chandra in the offences under Sections 366, 365, 325, 324 read with Section 34, 379, 376(2)(g), 376(2)(g) read with Section 34, 376 (2)(g) read with Section 3(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocites) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act 1989'). 2. The prosecution case is:- That on 28.06.1996 PW-1 Sharda, PW-2 Smt. Parvati, PW-6 Pratap and PW-7 Munna boarded a bus at Baran to reach their village Balarpur Uperheiti, and alighted at bus stand Mamooni at about 8 p.m. Since it was too late, they all stayed at Mamooni and having taken their food went on the roof of a school to sleep. It is alleged by the complainant Mst. Parvati that in the intervening night of 28th and 29th of June of 1996 at about 1:00 – 1:30 (A.M.) when she was sleeping, a person touched to awaken her and said that she was being called by Devi. When she got awakened, she found two persons standing on the roof, one person caught hold of her hand and another person dragged Mst. Sharda and came down stairs. These two persons took them to an embankment of pond. She saw in the light of moon one person who was wearing black pant and shirt. The person who awakened her was wearing only pant and the upper part of the body was naked. The third person was wearing pant and Baniyan. The person who was standing on the embankment of pond endeavoured to tie the hands of Pratap but he somehow escaped and fled. The person who had caught hold of her, tried to gag her mouth by hand but she screamed and resisted to save herself. That person was having a knife in his another hand and during the protest she sustained injury in her little finger and finally succeeded in escaping from the clutches of that man. It is further alleged that those three miscreants had taken Mst. Sharda and Munna to some unknown place. The complainant Mst. Parvati reached at village Mamooni where the police recorded her Parchabayan Ex.P/5 whereupon First Information Report Ex.P/21 was lodged and investigation commenced. 3. It is further alleged that those three miscreants had taken Mst. Sharda and Munna to some unknown place. The complainant Mst. Parvati reached at village Mamooni where the police recorded her Parchabayan Ex.P/5 whereupon First Information Report Ex.P/21 was lodged and investigation commenced. 3. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of witnesses acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, prepared the site plan Ex.P/6, recovered Munna vide memo Ex.P/7, arrested the accused Thakur lal vide memo Ex.P/22 and accused Phool Chand vide memo Ex.P/23, recovered a knife vide memo Ex.P/9 at the instance of Thakur lal in pursuance of information Ex.P/24 furnished by him, the test identification parad of both the accused was conducted by Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj, got both Mst. Sharda and Mst. Parvati medically examined, drew the necessary memos and after usual investigation submitted police report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. against the accused persons Phool Chandra and Thakur lal in the offences under Sections 363, 366, 365, 370, 379 of IPC and Section 3 of Act 1989 and filed challan against the accused Sita Ram under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. as he was absconding. 4. In due course of time, the case came up for trial before Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Baran. Both the accused Thakur lal and Phool Chandra were indicted for the offences under Sections 366, 365, 376(2) read with Section 34 and Section 376(2)(g) of IPC read with Section 3(2) of Act 1989, 324 in alternate 325/34 and 379 of IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. The prosecution to prove its case examined in all 22 witnesses. In their explanation under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. both the accused claimed innocence and pleaded that both Dy.S.P. and Sub-inspector gave them beating to extract the present abode or camping place of dacoit Hari Singh which they indeed did not know and thus they were falsely implicated in this case. 6. Heard learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, learned counsel for the respondents and with their assistance scanned the relevant material available on record. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has contended that both PW-1 Mst. Sharda and PW-2 Parvati have candidly deposed that the accused-respondents caught hold of them and took them to embankment of pond where PW-2 Parvati succeeded in escaping but PW-1 Mst. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has contended that both PW-1 Mst. Sharda and PW-2 Parvati have candidly deposed that the accused-respondents caught hold of them and took them to embankment of pond where PW-2 Parvati succeeded in escaping but PW-1 Mst. Sharda was ravished firstly at the pond and thereafter, on tube-well by the accused-respondents. Both the witnesses PW-1 Mst. Sharda and PW-2 Mst. Parvati have identified the accused persons during test identification parade. PW-6 Pratap and PW-7 Munna have corroborated their statements. There is no reason to disbelieve their testimony and from their evidence the alleged offence are very well proved against the accused-respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The learned trial court has committed an error in disbelieving their testimony and as such the acquittal of the accused-respondents may be set aside and they be convicted in the alleged offences and punished adequately. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent in contra has canvassed that the whole prosecution case rests on the identification of the accused persons which in the instant case is of no value. The learned counsel Mr. Deepak Sharma drawing my attention to the statement of PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. Parvati and PW-7 Munna has contended that these witnesses were called by the Investigating Officer in police station Shahbad continuously for three days where both the accused were under-arrest. They all have admitted that they met both the accused persons in police station and their mark of identification were also told to them. In view of these statements of the prosecution witnesses, the test identification report Ex.P/4 is of no value. Since the prosecution has failed to link the accused persons with the commission of the offence in the instant case, they deserve acquittal. The learned trial court, after proper appreciation of the prosecution evidence has rightly arrived at the finding of acquittal which may be upheld. He has cited the Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1981 pg. 97, R.L.W. 1983 pg. 326 and RLW 1977, pg. 178 in support of his arguments. 9. Having carefully scanned and properly weighed the prosecution evidence of PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. Parvati, PW-7 Munna and PW-6 Pratap, it is noticed that the accused persons were not knowing the victims from before and they, first of all are found to have identified them during the test identification parade only. 178 in support of his arguments. 9. Having carefully scanned and properly weighed the prosecution evidence of PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. Parvati, PW-7 Munna and PW-6 Pratap, it is noticed that the accused persons were not knowing the victims from before and they, first of all are found to have identified them during the test identification parade only. The occurrence of this case took place during the intervening night of 28th and 29th of June, 1996. The accused Thakur lal and Phool Chandra are found to have been arrested on 30 June, 1996 and remained in police custody up to 6th of July, 1996. The test identification parade of these two accused persons was held by Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj in District Baran on 6th of July 1996. PW-1 Mst. Sharda, the victim of this case, who is alleged to have been ravished by both the accused persons one after another in succession against her will, has deposed in her cross-examination that when they were called in police station Shahbad, the accused persons were detained in police station and the Sub-inspector gave the identification mark of both the accused persons to them stating that one accused had pierced nose and ears and the other accused's thumb was cut off. She had seen both the accused in the police station. I find relevant to reproduce her statement which is thus:- <span class=”Hfont”> ^^;g lgh gS fd tc iqfyl us ges cqyk;k rks eqfYteku Fkkus esa cUn jgs Fks] ftudks eSus Fkkus esa cUn ns[kk FkkA ;g lgh gS fd Fkkusnkj us crk;k Fkk fd ,d eqfYte ds uke dku fNn jgs Fks o nwljs dk vaxwBk dVk gqvk gSA eSus Fkkus esa eqfYte dk uke dku o vaxwBk dVk gqvk ns[k fy;k FkkA** Likewise PW-2 Mst. Parvati also admitted in her cross-examination that police had detained the accused in the police station and called them in police station continuously for three days. Police gave a description of both the accused stating that one accused had pierced nose and ears and the one's thumb was cut off which she has seen in police station as well as in jail. Police gave a description of both the accused stating that one accused had pierced nose and ears and the one's thumb was cut off which she has seen in police station as well as in jail. Her statement is reproduced as under:- <span class=”Hfont”>^^;g lgh gS fd iqfyl okyksa us eqfYte dks idM+k] rc rhu fnu rd gedks Fkkus esa cqyk;k FkkA ;g lgh gS fd iqfyl us ;g crk;k Fkk fd ,d eqfYte ds uke dku dV jgk gS o nwljs dks vaxwBk dV jgk gSA eSus eqfYte dk ukd dku o vaxwBk dVk gqvk Fkkus esa ns[k fy;k Fkk o tsy esa Hkh ns[kk FkkA** The third witness is PW-7 Munna who also has admitted that he, Pratap, Mst. Sharda and Mst. Parvati were summoned by the police continuously for three days in police station Shahbad. They used to go in the morning and come back in the evening. Both the accused were detained in the police station. They had seen both the accused detained in police station. This witness deposed thus:- <span class=”Hfont”>^^;g lgh gS fd eSa] izrki] 'kkjnk o ikoZrh pkjksa rhu fnu rd lqcg 'kkgckn Fkkus tkrs Fks o 'kke dks okil vk tkrs FksA ge 'kkgckn Fkkus x;s] rc eqfYteku dks iqfyl us 'kkgckn Fkkus esa idM j[kk Fkk ;kfu eqfYteku 'kkgckn Fkkus esa feys FksA ;g lgh gS fd gekjs ihNs Hkkxus okys eqfYteku dks gh iqfyl us Fkkus esa idM j[kk FkkA** 10. Now adverting to the statements of PW-18 Surendra Kumar Jain, the then Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj, it is found that he reached on 6th of July 1996 at District Jail, Baran where he conducted the test identification parade of accused Thakur lal and Phool Chandra. He mixed up 14 other prisoners along with them and called all the four witnesses Mst. Sharda, Mst. Parvati, Munna and Pratap who rightly identified them. 11. In the case of Yad Ram and Others vs. the State of Rajasthan, Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1981 pg. 97, the dacoits were shown to the witnesses in police station. The witnesses did not give any description of any culprit in their statements. The Investigating Officer also did not explain in his evidence as to how he came to know that the accused persons were among the culprits and what led him to arrest them. 97, the dacoits were shown to the witnesses in police station. The witnesses did not give any description of any culprit in their statements. The Investigating Officer also did not explain in his evidence as to how he came to know that the accused persons were among the culprits and what led him to arrest them. This court held that “All the circumstances mentioned above would show that the alleged identification of the appellants by the witnesses in the trial carries no evidentiary value.” 12. In the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Jeeta Singh, R.L.W. 1983 pg. 326, after the arrest of the accused, all the opportunities were taken by the police to make sure that the witnesses became familiar with the accused and see him before he was put to test identification in the jail. This court did not believe the identification and held that test identification parade was of no value in that case. 13. Similarly, in the case of Ganga Singh vs. The State of Rajasthan, RLW 1977, pg. 178, mixed preparation of the accused persons of this case bore the ratio of 4:10. It was held by this court under circumstances that the test identification parade was not fair and the same was not accepted. 14. When an offence is committed by a unknown culprit and person is arrested of suspicion of his committing the crime, it is usual to hold test identification parade. The suspected accused is mixed up with the under trial prisoners generally in proportion of 9:1, almost similar in structure and not grossly dissmilar in status and the witness is asked to pick up the person he saw during the commission of the crime. It belongs to investigation stage and is essentially governed by Section 162 of Cr.P.C. It may be recalled that identification in jail is not a substantial piece of evidence. It can be used for the purpose of corroboration only (Rajkishore vs. State AIR 1971 Supreme Court 1058). It belongs to investigation stage and is essentially governed by Section 162 of Cr.P.C. It may be recalled that identification in jail is not a substantial piece of evidence. It can be used for the purpose of corroboration only (Rajkishore vs. State AIR 1971 Supreme Court 1058). Thus, the vital factor in determining the value of such identification parades is the effectiveness of the precautions taken by those responsible for holding them against the identifying witness having an opportunity of seeing the person to be identified by them before they are paraded with other persons and also against the identifying witnesses being provided by the Investigating Authority with other unfair aid or assistance so as to facilitate the identification of the accused concerned. The two factors of basic importance in the evaluation of the identification are firstly, the persons required to identify and accused who have had no opportunity of seeing him after the commission of the crime and secondly, no mistakes are made by them. 15. In the case of Subhash vs. State of U.P. AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1222, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that “Identifying witness not giving any particulars about the features either in the FIR or in their statements to police but they identify suspects in test identification parade and then in court no reliance on this identification can be put and the accused is to be acquitted.” In the instant appeal, the witnesses were not familiar to the accused persons from before. They had seen two accused persons on the roof of the school when they were awakened by them and saw the third accused at the bank of the pond in the light of moon. These witnesses have simply stated as to what cloths they were wearing at that time but the description of their features and structure was not given. One more alarming adverse situation against the prosecution is that the accused persons were not kept Baparda from the time of arrest till the test identification parade was held in jail at police station during police custody. 16. In the light of aforesaid observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court the test identification parade conducted by the Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj and identification parade report Ex.P/4 is found of no value as all the three material witnesses namely PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. 16. In the light of aforesaid observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court the test identification parade conducted by the Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj and identification parade report Ex.P/4 is found of no value as all the three material witnesses namely PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. Parvati and PW-7 Munna have unequivocally admitted that they visited the police station continuously for three days where both the accused were detained in police custody and they had seen them in the police station. They were also memorized their marks of identification. Apart this, these witnesses also never gave the description with regard to the feature and structure of the accused persons in their police statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Thus, all these circumstances reveal that the witnesses had already seen the accused persons in the police station before holding the test identification parade and thus, the identification of the accused persons which has become the basis of the arrest of the accused persons in this case looses its value and such identification cannot be the basis of conviction of the accused. 17. Albeit, the accused have been charged with the offence of rape also. PW-1 Mst. Sharda stated that first of all the accused ravished her on tube-well and thereafter, she was taken to jungle where too they committed rape upon her. The prosecutrix has nowhere stated that she showed any resistance to the act of the accused. Had she shown any resistance to the act of rape the accused would have applied force and impliedly during the commission of offence of rape she would have sustained injuries not only on her private parts but on other parts of the body also. 18. PW-1 Mst. Sharda was examined by PW-13 Dr. Satish Agarwal who prepared the medical examination report Ex.P/16. Dr. Agarwal did not find any injury on vagina or any part of the body except swelling on her left foot. Dr. Agarwal also stated in his cross-examination that he did not find any such characteristic on her body which could lead him to say that she was raped by anybody. Albeit, to prove the offence of rape, the evidence of prosecutrix does not require any corroboration, provided her testimony is found to be trustworthy and reliable. The evidence of the prosecutrix in this regard does not inspire any confidence. Albeit, to prove the offence of rape, the evidence of prosecutrix does not require any corroboration, provided her testimony is found to be trustworthy and reliable. The evidence of the prosecutrix in this regard does not inspire any confidence. Not only that the prosecutrix's evidence is uncorroborated and her statements per se does not lend any support of its' being worthy of credence. 19. With regard to the theft of Rs. 200/-, PW-1 Mst. Sharda deposed that she had kept Rs. 200/- in her bag. When she checked her bag after this incident, she found that Rs. 200/- were missing from her bag which have been taken out by the accused. Whereas, the charge of theft read over to the accused is altogether different. The accused have been charged of having committed the theft of Rs. 200/- of Mst. Parvati. Thus, the evidence with regard to the theft of Rs. 200/- is totally contradictory to the charge framed against them. 20. In the ultimate analysis, it is found that the case of the prosecution is totally devoid of evidence. There is nothing on record which may connect the accused persons with the offence of the instant appeal. There is only one so called material evidence of identification of the accused persons but that also has been found to be of no value. The statements of PW-1 Mst. Sharda, PW-2 Mst. Parvati and PW-7 Munna do not inspire any confidence. Their statements are contradictory to each other, incomplete, inconsistent and vague on material particulars. There is no evidence on record which may connect the accused persons with the offence of the instant case. The learned trial court has critically analyzed and properly appreciated the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and his judgment is cogent and well merited. I am in full unison with the finding of acquittal arrived at by the learned trial court and thus, to my firm view, it calls for no intervention. 21. For these reasons, the criminal appeal being devoid of merits stands dismissed. The accused respondents are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds stand discharged.