JUDGMENT Vinod Prasad, J. Challenge in this appeal by the four appellants Yad Ram A-l, Chhida A-2, Ram Swaroop A-3 and Tunda A-4 are to their conviction u/s 395/397, I.P.C, recorded by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura in S.T. No. 7 of 1976. State v. Yad Ram and others, connected with S.T. No. 395 of 1976. State v. Tunda, both relating to P. S. Chhata, district Mathura vide impugned judgment and order dated 24.5.1980 and imposed sentence of 8 years R.I. for both the offences.Prosecution allegations against the appellants, as was dictated orally by informant P.W. 1 Jagdish, at P. S. Chhata, district Mathura, on 21.1.1974, which was scribed by Head Constable Prem Pal Singh P.W. 3, were that P.W. 1 was a resident of village Vidawali. P. S. Chhata, district Mathura. On the intervening night between 20/21.1.1974 at about mid night, 7 or 8 dacoits raided his house and trespassed into it from the front door, which was unlached. Shrieks of house inmates and informant's wife awakened co-villagers. Some of the dacoits started committing dacoity in informant's house whereas others entered into the house of co-villagers Sanwalia and started committing dacoity. Hue and cry by house inmates had attracted co-villagers Balu s/o Chanda Gadaria, Tejpal, Bhojl @ Bhajan Lal sons of Malkhan, Kamal Singh s/o Patola, Mahendra s/o Ratan Singh, Babu s/o Munshi and Ram Singh s/o Dhani Ram at the spot armed with lathis and they all challenged the dacoits, who then resorted to tiring causing injuries to the villagers. P.W. 1 meanwhile, set ablaze heaps of thatch, which was kept in his precinct, as a result of which flames sufficient for identifying dacoits lighted the scene. Sanwalia's flashing of torch also facilitated identification of the dacoits. Women inmates of the house, informant's wife Smt. Bataso, Jaldevi daughter of Sanwalia, Angoori his daughter-in-law were belaboured during the dacoity as a result of which they sustained injuries. Two of the miscreants were armed with country made pistols whereas, one each was armed with a gun and an axe, while rest of them had lathis. Two of the dacoits were having a thin lanky physic and rest of them were of average built and heights and some of them had long hair. One of the miscreants of average height was having a dark coloured complexion. Two of the dacoits were having a thin lanky physic and rest of them were of average built and heights and some of them had long hair. One of the miscreants of average height was having a dark coloured complexion. Dacoits were identified in the flame lights emitting from flames and flashes of torch light and could be identified by the witnesses if brought before them. Most of the dacoits were wearing soiled clothes, tahmads, dhotis and kurta etc. and none of them were speaking local dialect. When the villagers mounted pressure, dacoits fled away from the scene of the Incident alongwith looted bounty. Injured. persons were carried to the police station in a bullock-cart alongwith three empty cartridges, two metal caps, one loin wrapper (Tahmad), one muffler and a club (dunda), which were left behind by the dacoits while fleeing from the spot and were got deposited. In the aforesaid dacoity Rs. 2,336 cash, two silver bracelets, weighing one and a half kilogram, and 1/4 kgs. of other silver ornaments alongwith some lady drappers were looted. On the dictation by P.W. 1 Prem Pal Singh, Head Moharrir, P.W. 3 scribed F.I.R. Exhibit Ka-1, on the basis of which, he prepared G.D. entry Ext. Ka-3. Left over articles by the dacoits, material Exts. 1 to Ka-5, were seized regarding which a seizure memo Ext. Ka-2 was also prepared by P.W. 2. Investigation into the crime was commenced by Harvir Singh P.W. 11, who was acting as S. O., Chhata. After copying the F.I.R., P.W. 11 recorded investigatory statements of informant, Mahendra, Tejpal, Bhojl @ Bhajan Lal, Jaldevi, and Babu and thereafter came to the spot at 7 a.m. where he interrogated and recorded 161, Cr. P. C. statements of Ram Singh. Sanwalia, Angoori and Subhash. Conducting spot inspection Investigating Officer prepared site plan Ext. Ka-13. Subsequent thereto, he collected ashes, Ext. Ka-6 from the spot and prepared it's seizure memo Ext. Ka-4. Investigating Officer also seized Sanwalia's torch and prepared it's seizure memo Ext. Ka-5. Injured persons, who had arrived at the police station were dispatched for their medical examination. Same day P.W. 11 recorded statements of Kamal Singh, Smt. Bataso. Jawahar Singh, Brijlal and others. Thereafter, apprehending the accused. Investigating Officer gave a report for their identification. Report regarding conducting of identification of Tunda A-4 is Ext. Ka-5. Injured persons, who had arrived at the police station were dispatched for their medical examination. Same day P.W. 11 recorded statements of Kamal Singh, Smt. Bataso. Jawahar Singh, Brijlal and others. Thereafter, apprehending the accused. Investigating Officer gave a report for their identification. Report regarding conducting of identification of Tunda A-4 is Ext. Ka-16 and report of conducting identification of rest of the dacoits is Ext. Ka-17. A-4, albeit was arrested on 14.5.1974 and was put in police lock up on 15.5.1974 but his identification was got conducted on 24.7.1974 by P.W. 8 N. A. Vishwanthan, S.D.M.. Sadabad, who had proved the Identification memo Ext. Ka-7. According to the said S.D.M., A-4 was correctly Identified by witnesses Kamal Singh, Mahendra, Sanwalia and Jagdish and was wrongly identified by one another witness Babu. Identification of rest of the dacoits were conducted by S.D.M., Civil Defence, R. N. Saxena, who had renounced the world and had embraced sainthood and, therefore, prosecution examined N. N. Batra P.W. 10 and led secondary evidence to prove identification memo of those accused-appellants Yad Ram, Ram Swaroop and Chidda as Exts. Ka-10 to Ka-12. For the same purpose, prosecution had also examined Budhesh Chandra. Assistant Nazir P.W. 13 and led secondary evidence regarding Exts. Ka-3, Ka-10, Ka-11. Ka-12 and defence Exhibits Kha-1 and Kha-2. Concluding investigation Investigating Officer had charge-sheeted the accused vide Ext. Ka-14 and Ka-15. By the former chargesheet only appellant Tunda A-4 was charge-sheeted whereas rest of the accused A-l, A-2, A-3 were charge-sheeted by vide Ext. Ka-15. 3. Genuineness of the Injury reports of injured persons were admitted by the defence and It's formal proof were dispensed with and therefore, it were exhibited as Exts. Ka-20 to Ka-27, the contents of which are noted below : Exhibit Ka-20 Examined Sri Kamal Singh s/o Patola aged about 22 years r/o Bidawli. P. S. Chhata (Mathura) at 5 p.m. Date 21.1.1974 Police Constable brought by C.P. No. 322 Sri Mahendra Singh of P. S. Chhata. M.I. : -Scar 1" x 3/4" on the front of the left leg. Injuries : (1) One gun shot wound of entrance. It is 1/8" x 1/8" x 1/8" on the back Rt. forearm upper 1/3. One shot recovered simple. Due to gunshot probable Duration-About 3/4 day. (2) Another gun shot wound of entrance. It is 1/8" x 1/8" x skin on the Lt. skin centre. Injuries : (1) One gun shot wound of entrance. It is 1/8" x 1/8" x 1/8" on the back Rt. forearm upper 1/3. One shot recovered simple. Due to gunshot probable Duration-About 3/4 day. (2) Another gun shot wound of entrance. It is 1/8" x 1/8" x skin on the Lt. skin centre. Simple due to gun shot. Exhibit Ka-21 : Examined Sri Bhajan Lal s/o Malkhan aged about 50 yrs. r/o Bidawli, P. S. Chhata (Mathura) at 4.45 p.m. dated 21.1.1974 Police Constable, Brought by C.P. No. Abdul Waheed No. 2380. M.I. : Scar on the front of the Left leg. Injuries : (1) 3 small gun shot wounds of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deep in an area of 2 and 1/2" x l "on the front of the Rt. thigh middle 1/3" one shot removed and sent to police. (2) Small contused wound 1/4" x 1/4" x skin on the back of the left middle finger middle 1/3. (3) Contusion 1" x 1" on the top of the Head centre. All are simple injuries injury No. 2 is due to gunshot and the rest are due to blunt weapon. Probable duration fresh Injuries. Exhibit Ka-22 Examined Smt. Batasa w/o Jagdish Singh Thakur aged about 25 yrs. r/o Bidawali, P. S. Chhata (Mathura) at 5 p.m. dated 21.1.1974. Police Constable brought by C. Abdul Waheed No. 238 C.P. of P. S. Chhata. M.I. : Mole on the left supra clavicle. Injuries : (1) Contusion 2" x 1 and 1/2" on the Rt. cheek. (2) Contusion 2" x 1" on the back of the left shoulder. (3) Contusion 1/2" x 1/8" x skin on the top of the left index finger, slightly under neath. NATURE: All are simple injuries, and are due to blunt weapon. Probable duration : -fresh injuries. Exhibit Ka-23 Examined Mahendra s/o Sri Gyan Singh Thakur aged about 16 yrs. r/o Bidawli, P. S. Chhata, Mathura at 4.30 p.m. on 21.1.1974 Police Constable brought by C.P. Abdul Waheed No. 238 C.P. of P. S. Chhata. M.I. : Mole on the Epigastre region. Injury : (1) 30 small gun shot wound of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin is deeper tissue in an area of covering the whole Rt. leg starting from the knee of the Ankle. One shot taken out and sealed and sent to the police. M.I. : Mole on the Epigastre region. Injury : (1) 30 small gun shot wound of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin is deeper tissue in an area of covering the whole Rt. leg starting from the knee of the Ankle. One shot taken out and sealed and sent to the police. Simple injury and due to gun shot. Probable Duration.-Fresh injury. Exhibit Ka-24 Examined Sri Bhoji s/o Sri Malkhan Thakur aged about 40 yrs. r/o Bidawli. P.S. Chhata at 4.45 a.m. dated 21.1.1974 Police Constable brought by C.P. 238 of Abdul Waheed. M.I. : Mole on the centre of the forehead. Injuries : (1) Contusion 2 and 1/2" x 2 and 1/2" on the front of the left thigh lower 1/3rd. (2) Contused wound 2 and 1/2" x 1" skin, on the inner side the right knee. Both are simple injuries and are due to blunt weapon. Probable duration.-Fresh injuries. Exhibit Ka-25 Examined Ballu s/o Chanda Baghaley Thakur aged about 40 yrs. r/o vill. Bidawli P. S. Chhata (Mathura) at 4.00 a.m. dated 21.1.1974 Police case brought by C.P. Abdul Waheed No. 238 P. S. Chhata. M.I. : Soar on the front of the left index finger. Injuries : (1) One gun shot wound of entry 1/8" x 1/8" to deeper tissues on the right side chest 3 and 1/4" upper and inner to the Right nipple. Simple and due to gun shot. Probable duration.-Fresh injury. Exhibit Ka-26 Examined Sri Tejpal aged about 35 yrs. r/o Bldawli, P. S. Chhata s/o Sri Malkhan Thakur Rajpur at 3.30 a.m. dated 21.1.1974 police case brought by C.P. Abdul Waheed No. 238 P. S. Chhata. M.I. : Mole on the Rt. side forehead. Injuries : (1) 29 gun shot wound of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue in an area of 1 and 1/2 feet x 1" on the Rt. side chest. (2) 2 Gun shot wound of entry one on the Rt. side neck and the other outer Rt. upper lip each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue 6" apart. (3) 33 small gun shot wound of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue on the back of the Rt. hand and shoulder. side chest. (2) 2 Gun shot wound of entry one on the Rt. side neck and the other outer Rt. upper lip each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue 6" apart. (3) 33 small gun shot wound of entry each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue on the back of the Rt. hand and shoulder. (4) six small gun shot wound of entrance each 1/8" x 1/8" x skin to deeper tissue in an area of foot and 3" on the front of the left forearm. (5) Shots have been taken and sealed and sent to the police. All are simple Injuries and are due to gun shot. Probable duration.-Fresh injuries. Exhibit Ka-27 Examined Jai Devi aged about (paper-torn) yrs. w/o Sri Narain Singh Rajpur Thakur, r/o vill. bidawali P. S. Chhata (Mathura) at 3 a.m. dated 21.1.1974. Brought by C/-238 Abdul Waheed of P.S. Chhata. M.I. : Two mole on the centre of the forehead. Injuries : (1) Incised wound 1 and 1/2" x 1" x muscle deep, on the chin and partly it is bone deep. (Through and through) Two Rt. lower present others are shaking only but bot dislocated. (2) Contusion 2" x 2" on the top of the left shoulder. Probable duration. -Fresh. injuries No. 1 is due to sharp cutting instruments and No. II is due to blunt weapon. Both are simple injuries. 4. Charge-sheeting of the accused resulted in their summoning and finding their case triable by Sessions court, it was committed to Sessions court where it was registered as S.T. No. 7 of 1976, State v. Yad Ram and two others, and S.T. No. 395 of 1976. State v. Tunda. IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura, charged all the accused, A-l, A-2, A-3 and A-4 and one other dacoit Pyare Lal for offences u/s 395/397, I.P.C. on 30.2.1979. All the accused abjured these charges and claimed to be tried and hence to establish their guilt and bring home the charges, their prosecution commenced. To establish the* charge and bring home accused guilt, prosecution tendered evidences of 13 of it's witnesses out of whom Jagdish P.W. 1, Mahendra P.W. 2, Kamla Singh P.W. 5 and Bhoji P.W. 6 were fact witnesses. To establish the* charge and bring home accused guilt, prosecution tendered evidences of 13 of it's witnesses out of whom Jagdish P.W. 1, Mahendra P.W. 2, Kamla Singh P.W. 5 and Bhoji P.W. 6 were fact witnesses. Formal witnesses included Head Mohirr, Prem Pal Singh P.W. 3, Rang Lal P.W. 4, Hira Singh P.W. 7, N. A. Vishwanathan P.W. 8, Pitam Singh P.W. 9, N. N. Batra P.W. 10. Harivir Singh P.W. 11, Satish Chandra P.W. 12 and Budhesh Chandra P.W. 13. 5. All the accused in their statements u/s 313, Cr. P.C. pleaded their false implication and denied incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidence. 6. IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, vide impugned judgment and order dated 24.5.1980, held that prosecution has successfully established the charge against the four appellants and therefore, convicted them u/s 395/397, I.P.C. and sentenced them to 8 years R.1., which conviction and sentence is under challenge in the instant appeal. 7. When the appeal was called out for hearing, after more than three decades, Sri V. K. Tripathi. learned advocate appeared for A-2 but for rest of the appellants A-l, A-3 and A-4 none appeared. Perusal of the record of the appeal revealed that appellant A-3 Ram Swaroop had died and. therefore, his appeal was abated. Therefore, for rest of the two appellants A-l and A-4, Sri Vinay Saran. advocate was appointed as amicus curiae to argue the appeal and assisted the Court. 8. Castigating the impugned Judgment of conviction and sentence, both the counsels submitted that the incident occurred in the dark wintry night of 20/21.1.1974 and, therefore, there was no opportunity for the witnesses to identify any of the dacoits. There was absence of proper source of light facilitating identification in the wintry night, when there should be fog and mist and consequently, flickering of the flames of burnt heap of thatch and flashing of torches will not facilitate such an identification. In the F.I.R., informant had nowhere mentioned that he had also flashed his torch during the incident and the only torch, which is mentioned in the F.I.R. was used by Sanwalia but, very queerly, prosecution did not examine him during trial and, therefore, for the use of torch, prosecution story is incredible and cannot be attached with any authenticity. In the F.I.R., informant had nowhere mentioned that he had also flashed his torch during the incident and the only torch, which is mentioned in the F.I.R. was used by Sanwalia but, very queerly, prosecution did not examine him during trial and, therefore, for the use of torch, prosecution story is incredible and cannot be attached with any authenticity. Next it was submitted that there is absence of evidence on record that the accused persons were kept under veil and, therefore, the entire identification proceedings in their respect is unconvincing and unreliable and, therefore, cannot be attached with any credence. Supplementary argument in this respect, harangued by both the counsels, were that the appellants were shown to the witnesses prior to their test identification parade and to facilitate it, identification proceedings were got delayed intentionally. Elaborating the argument, it was submitted that appellant A-l was arrested on 14.5.1974 and was put in police lockup on 15.5.1974 and his identification was done on 24.7.1974 after a gap of unexplained enormous delay of more than seventy days. Rest of the two surviving appellants A-l and A-2, were arrested on 3.2.1974 and were sent to jail on 5.2.1974. Their identification was conducted on 16.4.1974 after a gap of seventy four days. It was, therefore, suggested that since the prosecution has not offered an convincing, acceptable and cogent explanation for such belated identification, conviction of the appellants should not be affirmed and approved. In this respect, both the counsels relied upon Apex Court decisions in Satrughana alias Satrughana Parida and others v. State of Orissa, 1994 SCC (Cri) 1424 (paragraph 2); Soni v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1982) 3 SCC 368 a ; Chotey Lal v. State of U. P., 1994 SCC (Cri) 144 (paragraph 4); Malkhan v. State of U. P., 2004 (50) ACC 273 : 2004 (3) ACR 2850 (paragraph 15) and Rajesh Govind Jagesha v. State of Maharashtra, 1999 SCC (Cri) 1452 : 1999 (3) ACR 2637 (SC) (paragraph 4). On the strength of aforesaid Apex Court decisions, it was contended that since, in the instant appeal, no prosecution witness has offered any explanation for belated test identification parade of the appellants therefore, conviction of all the appellants be scored out and they be set at liberty. On the strength of aforesaid Apex Court decisions, it was contended that since, in the instant appeal, no prosecution witness has offered any explanation for belated test identification parade of the appellants therefore, conviction of all the appellants be scored out and they be set at liberty. Primarily on the above submissions,' both the counsels contended that the appeal of the appellants be allowed and they be acquitted of the charges, Attour, with a tongue and cheek, learned amicus curiae contended that the testimony of informant Jagdish P.W. 1 is not reliable as his deposition that the dacoits came to him and asked him not to flash his torch otherwise he will be shot dead, is a deposition, which is very unnatural and unworthy of credence being improbable and against natural human conduct. 9. Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned A.G.A. argued conversely and submitted that the accused persons, to discredit the testimony of prosecution witnesses, did not afford any opportunity to them to explain the omissions and contradictions, which has been argued by them. It was contended that neither conducting of test identification parade nor arrest of the appellants were challenged by the defence and, therefore, no benefit should accrue to them on that score. It was next submitted that the prosecution witnesses had no axe to grind against the appellants and, therefore, chances of their false implication is very remote. Additionally, it was submitted that all the prosecution witnesses had given well-knit consistent, cogent, confidence inspiring evidences and there is nothing on record, which may suggest that their testimonies were not truthful. In such a view, conviction of the appellants has to be affirmed submitted learned A.G.A. It was next argued that there was sufficient light at the spot during course of the incident and hence identification of the appellants was free from doubt and since, from depositions of fact witnesses, it has been elicited that the incident occurred for quite some time therefore, all the fact witnesses had sufficient opportunity to identify the dacoits and in such a view, appeal lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. 10. I have considered the arguments by both the sides and have perused the evidences on record. The incident occurred 37 years ago in the intervening night between 20/21.1.1974. Depositions of all the fact. witnesses are clear and unambiguous when they stated that it was a pitch dark night. 10. I have considered the arguments by both the sides and have perused the evidences on record. The incident occurred 37 years ago in the intervening night between 20/21.1.1974. Depositions of all the fact. witnesses are clear and unambiguous when they stated that it was a pitch dark night. Normally wintry nights are pervaded and engulfed by mist and fog. In such a view, it is difficult to believe that the witnesses had sufficient opportunity to identify the dacoits, who were 8 or 10 in numbers. According to the informant, he was hiding behind a wall. Dacoits were armed with firearms as well as blunt objects. What Is most unsatisfactory and unconvincing is the prosecution allegation that the women folk, who were in deep slumber inside the house, had left the main door of the house unlatched and unbolt. This allegation does not seem to be very credible. It is also very unnatural that the dacoits will point out at P.W. 1 but will not assault or hurt him although they did resort to firing on the house inmates causing gunshot injury to them. This deposition of P.W. 1, therefore, also does not inspire any confidence. Turning to the deposition of other fact witnesses, their evidence also suffers from the same vices. Without further deliberating over other aspects of the matter, what is perceptibly clear is that in the present case, appellants were arrested in February and May, 1974. Their identification was conducted after a gap of 70-74 days. In their interrogatory statements, none of identifying witnesses had spelt out any special features of the appellants. They had not specified any specific role to them during commission of dacoity. So much so that they had not specified weapons carried and wielded by any of them. They failed to spell out their specific attire etc. It was for the prosecution to establish it's case beyond any shadow of doubt. Prosecution cannot gain any advantage from the loopholes of the defence case since defence is entitled to have benefit of all dicey evidences occurring in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses. They failed to spell out their specific attire etc. It was for the prosecution to establish it's case beyond any shadow of doubt. Prosecution cannot gain any advantage from the loopholes of the defence case since defence is entitled to have benefit of all dicey evidences occurring in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses. In this respect, it Is recollected that the Apex Court in the decision of Rajesh Govind Jagesha (supra) in paragraph 4 has been pleased to hold as under : This Court in State of A. P. v. M. V. Ramana Reddy (Dr.), held that where there is unexplained delay in holing the Identification parade, the evidence of the prosecution regarding identity of an accused cannot be held absolutely reliable and in such a case the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. The explanation for delay in holding the identification parade offered by the prosecution in the instant case is not trustworthy. The nonavailability of Magistrate in a city like Bombay for over a period of five weeks from the date of the arrest of accused 1 and 2 and three weeks from the arrest of accused 3 and 4 cannot be accepted. It is not denied that scores of Magistrates are available in the city of Bombay and that the investigating agency was not obliged to get the parade conducted from a specified Magistrate. The High Court was not justified in holding that the parade could not be held early on account of alleged difficulties of the Special Executive Magistrate. It was not for the defence to prove that the parade held was suffering from legal infirmities because, admittedly, the onus of proof in criminal case never shifts as the accused is presumed to be innocent till proved otherwise, beyond all reasonable doubts, by the prosecution. In cases where a. person is alleged to have committed the offence and is not previously known to the witnesses, it is obligatory on the part of the investigation agency to hold identification parade for the purpose of enabling the witnesses to identify the person alleged to have committed the offence. The absence of test identification may not be fatal if the accused is known or sufficiently described in the complaint leaving no doubt in the mind of the Court regarding his involvement. The absence of test identification may not be fatal if the accused is known or sufficiently described in the complaint leaving no doubt in the mind of the Court regarding his involvement. Such a parade may not be necessary in a case where the accused person is arrested on the spot immediately after the occurrence. The evidence of identifying the accused person at the trial, for the first time, is from its very nature, inherently of a weak character. This Court in Budhsen v. State of U. P., held that the evidence In order to carry conviction should ordinarily clarify as to how and under what circumstances the complainant or the witnesses came to pick out the accused person and the details of the part which such persons played in the crime in question with reasonable particularity. The test Identification is considered as a safe rule of prudence for corroboration. Though the holding of the identification proceedings may not be substantive evidence, yet such proceedings are used for corroboration purposes in order to believe or not the involvement of the person brought before the Court for the commission of the crime. The holding of identification parade being a rule of prudence is required to be followed strictly in accordance with the settled position of law and expeditiously. The delay, if any, has to be explained satisfactorily by the prosecution. 11. While opining thus, Apex Court has relied upon it's earlier decisions in State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Dr. M.V. Ramana Reddy and others, AIR 1991 SC 1938 and Budhsen v. State of U.P., 1970 SCC (Crl) 343. In the present case, neither the Investigating Officer nor S.D.M, nor any other witnesses had spelt out any cogent and acceptable reason for delaying the test identification parade for more than two months. Although Investigating Officer stated that because of the State election, identification was got delayed but in that respect, there is no credible material on record. Gap of more than two and half months was required to be explained satisfactorily. The Apex Court, on delayed Identification, had given benefit to the accused and had disbelieved their involvement in the crime. On this score, the decisions cited by the appellants' counsels mentioned herein above are relevant and. therefore, the opinions by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decisions are reproduced below. In Satrughana alias Satrughana Parida (supra) (paragraph 2). The Apex Court, on delayed Identification, had given benefit to the accused and had disbelieved their involvement in the crime. On this score, the decisions cited by the appellants' counsels mentioned herein above are relevant and. therefore, the opinions by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decisions are reproduced below. In Satrughana alias Satrughana Parida (supra) (paragraph 2). Apex Court has been pleased to observe as under : Where the fate of the accused persons hangs solely on the identification by the witnesses who claim to have seen them almost 1-1/2 months prior to the date of identification, it is the duty of the prosecution to state why the identification parade could not be arranged immediately after the arrest of the accused and without loss of time. Unless there is good reason for the delay, the value regarding the evidence of identification gets adversely affected. This dilution of the evidentiary value of identification by witnesses who claim to have seen the accused at night almost 1-1/2 months back but who did not in their statements before the police or in the first information report reveal any special features for identification, is a matter which weighs against the prosecution. It must be remembered that the accused persons are required to be produced before the Court latest within 15 days for their arrest and, therefore, it would be reasonable to infer that they were so produced. There is nothing on record to show that the prosecution had taken care to ensure that their identity was not revealed when they were taken to Court and produced as required by law. In these circumstances, when the prosecution witnesses had admitted in their oral statements that they had not noticed any special identifying features, it becomes unsafe to place implicit reliance on the evidence regarding identification emanating from the proceedings at the test identification parade. In these circumstances since there is no other corroborative evidence, we find it difficult to place implicit reliance on the identification made at the test identification parade. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt. 12. In Soni (supra) in paragraph 2, Apex Court has been pleased to observe as under : After hearing counsel on either side we are satisfied that the conviction of the appellant for the offence of dacoity is difficult to sustain. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt. 12. In Soni (supra) in paragraph 2, Apex Court has been pleased to observe as under : After hearing counsel on either side we are satisfied that the conviction of the appellant for the offence of dacoity is difficult to sustain. The conviction rests purely upon his identification by five witnesses, Smt. Koori, Pritam Singh, Kewal, Chaitoo and Sinru, but it cannot be forgotten that the identification parade itself was held after a lapse of 42 days from the date of the arrest of the appellant. This delay in holding the identification parade throws a doubt on the genuineness thereof apart from the fact that it is difficult that after lapse of such a long time the witnesses would be remembering the facial expressions of the appellant. If this evidence cannot be relied upon there is no other evidence which can sustain the conviction of the appellant. We, therefore, allow the appeal and acquit the appellant. 13. In another decision, Chotey Lal (supra) (paragraph 4), Apex Court has been pleased to observe as under : We have heard Mr U. R. Lalit, learned counsel for the appellant. He has challenged the veracity of the test identification parade on the ground that it was held two months and twenty days after the appellant's arrest. As mentioned above the appellant was arrested on April 4, 1969 and the test identification parade was held on June 24, 1969. There is nothing on the record to show as to why the prosecution could not hold the test identification parade immediately after the arrest of the appellant. In the absence of any other evidence the gross delay in holding the test identification parade makes the prosecution case doubtful. We have carefully and searchingly gone into the statement of witnesses including the Investigating Officer and other material on the record to find out any corroboration to the identification evidence but without any success. The proceedings of the test identification parade showing that the face of the appellant was covered with patches at various places does not inspire confidence. P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 made bare omnibus statements that they saw the appellant committing the dacoity. They do not associate their memory with any overt act or weapon in the hands of the appellant. The proceedings of the test identification parade showing that the face of the appellant was covered with patches at various places does not inspire confidence. P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 made bare omnibus statements that they saw the appellant committing the dacoity. They do not associate their memory with any overt act or weapon in the hands of the appellant. Taking overall view of the evidence we are of the view that the prosecution has not been able to take the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. We. therefore, give benefit of doubt to the appellant and acquit him. 14. Further, no recovery was made from the possession of these appellants nor they were charged u/s 412. I.P.C. None of them had made any disclosure statements about recovery. From the perusal of site plan it is difficult to figure out that fact witnesses were able to identify appellants in burnt thatch light as places W1 and W2 will not emanate lights over all the places and on the way. During investigation Investigating Officer could not fathom out identity of rest of the accused involved in the crime. None of the inmate ladies of the house was examined to lend credence to the prosecution version. Ali these factors cumulatively do not satisfy involvement of the appellants Into the dacoity. 15. Wrapping of the decisions, I find that the aforesaid decisions by the Apex Court are applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case and, therefore. I am of the opinion that the conviction of the appellants are unsustainable.Appeal is allowed. Conviction of the appellants u/s 395/397. I.P.C. through the impugned judgment and order dated 24.5.1980 is hereby set aside. Appellants are acquitted of those charges. They all are on ball, they need not surrender, their bail bonds and surety bonds are discharged. Let a copy of the Judgment be certified to the trial court for its intimation.