JUDGEMENT Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The Appellants have been convicted under Section 395 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to Rl for 7 years by a judgment dated, 19th August, 1994 in S. Tr. No 252 of 1989 passed by Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. 2. The prosecution case is that on the night of 4th and 5th August, 1988 the dacoity was committed in the house of the Informant and several house-holds articles were taken away by dacoits. 3. During trial the prosecution examined nine witnesses out of whom PW. 1 is the Informant whereas PW. 2, PW. 3 and PW. 4 are his family members. PW. 5 and PW. 6 are the Judicial Officers who conducted theTest Identification Parade of both the Appellants whereas PW. 7 is the Investigating Officer. PW. 8 and PW. 9 are formal in nature. 4. Since the name of the Appellants transpired during investigation they were remanded in the present case whereas the Test Identification Parade of the Appellant Dharam Deo Singh was held on 6th September, 1988 that of Surendra Sahni was held on 29th March, 1989. 5. During trial PW. 1, PW. 2 and PW. 3 supported the factum of dacoity whereas PW. 4 is not an eye witness. 6. It appears from the evidence of PW. 6, Judicial Officer who conducted the Test Identification of Appellant Dharam Deo Singh. PW. 6 has stated that PW. 1 and PW. 2 had identified Appellant, Surendra Sahni in the Test Identification Parade held on 29th March, 1989. It appears from the evidence of both these two Judicial Officers that the Test Identification Parade was held after much delay and the possibility of a wrong identification under the circumstances can not be ruled out. 7. In view of discussion made above, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated, 19th August, 1994 passed by Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in S. Tr. No. 252 of 1989 is set aside. The Appellants are discharged of the liability of their bail bonds.