JUDGEMENT Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The Appellants have been convicted under Section 395 I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years by a judgment dated 24.5.1994 by the learned IX, Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah in Sessions Trial No. 14/84. 2. The prosecution case is that on the night of 17/18.2.84 a dacoity was committed in the house of the informant by unknown dacoits who decamped with the booty. Subsequently during investigation either the names of the Appellants transpired through confessional statement or through direct statement recorded under Section 161 Code of Criminal Procedure as also the Appellant No. 2 was identified in the Test Identification Parade held on 18.5.1982 by P.W.1 & 5. 3. It has been submitted that in court P.W.4 identified Appellant No. 3 whereas P.W.5 identified Appellant Nos. 3 and 5 whereas the Appellant No. 1 was not identified by any one. 4. It has been submitted that there is complete paucity of credible evidence of with regard to the identification of the Appellants since even P.W.4 who is the son of the informant has admitted that most of the accused persons had covered the faces. Similarly P.W.6 has also stated that some of the dacoits concealed their faces and, therefore, it was difficult to rely on the alleged identification given out by the witnesses. 5. Further P.W.4 has failed to identify some of the accused persons during trial since the occurrence was about 4-1/2 years old. 6. On going through the evidence on record, I find that the evidence of the witnesses with regard to the identification of the Appellants is untrustworthy, since the names of the Appellants who were well known was disclosed belatedly or the Test Identification Parade was held about 3 months later. 7. In view of the discussions above, the appeal is allowed and conviction and sentence of the Appellants passed by learned IX, Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No. 14/84 are hereby set aside and the Appellants are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds.