A Test Identification Parade (TIP) is a very important criminal investigation procedure when the accused person is not known to the witnesses beforehand. A TIP is a method to identify the accused and is deemed corroborative evidence during court hearings. TIP is now governed in section 7 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023. This topic is concerned with facts required to explain or state relevant facts.

It provides that the facts required to explain or state a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or contradict an inference drawn from a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which determine the identity of anything or person whose identity is material or locate the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact occurred, or which indicate the relation of parties by whom any such fact was done, are relevant to the extent to which they are necessary for that purpose.

At times, a witness or a victim would be required to identify the accused on oath in court from their memory, such identification would constitute a relevant under section 7 BSA, (Section 9 evidence act). Memory, however, fades with time. Most often at the investigation stage itself, TIP are carried out, shortly after the crime has been committed and the witness or victim is requested to identify the accused. These statements can then be reduced into writing. Suppose, If victim or witness identified accused after the 5 years of crime has been committed then the reliability of their testimony stands enhanced and their testimony corroborated.

The idea of the parade is to examine the truthfulness of the witness on the issue of his ability to recognize among a number of individuals an unknown individual whom the witness had noticed in the context of a crime. It serves two principal functions which is in order to meet the requirements of the investigating agencies, a specific individual who was unknown to the witnesses before was also involved in the crime and in order to provide proof to support the evidence which the witness in question provides before the Court.

The issue of section 7 of BSA is addressed under section 54a of crpc, 1973. This section provides that where the identification of the accused by the witness is found necessary for inquiry into such offence in which the accused has been arrested, the court of competent jurisdiction, on application of the officer in charge of a police station, may order the accused so arrested to undergo identification by the witness in such mode as the court deems appropriate.[1]

Purpose of TIPs

An identification parade is useful for a number of reasons, and beause it is of such significance in the conduct of criminal investigations, we should deal with the legal significance of an identification parade from its foundation purposes. One of the purposes is to see if a witness is able to accurately identify the suspect. This is particularly useful if the witness had not seen the accused before outside of the incident.

In the case of Ramkishan Vs Bombay State[2], it was held that in the investigation of a crime, the police are required to conduct identification parades, in order to establish the identification of both the person, as well as the identification of the property.

This identification parade identifies the suspect alongside others who have similar distinguishing features and provides for an identification by the witness emulating the conditions that the witness relied upon in the first place, but more importantly without being induced or influenced. Although the identification parade assists in establishing the reliability of the witness for evidencing the identity of an unknown person who is causing the crime, his evidence is still best fatty suspect and will not be admissible as substantive evidence at that time.

Secondly, the parade is used to introduce corroborating evidence to support the witness testimony in court. However, while the identification of the witness at the parade is not substantive evidence in itself and therefore inadmissible, it is usually positive evidence to supporting the witness testimony, when evidence is led in court. This corroboration is nearly always required by the prosecution.

Finally, The Test Identification Parade is designed to eliminate the threat of the accused being falsely implicated. By allowing witnesses to view the accused or the suspect in a line up, it eliminates the risk of mistaken identification that can lead to wrongful convictions. [3]

The Test Identification Parade helps to protect an accused person's rights by ensuring that they are not falsely implicated because of an identification. It allows investigative authorities to check if someone is involved in the crime or not, thus making it quicker for them to progress any crime scene investigation. In a general sense, the Test Identification Parade is essential to the validity of the criminal justice system by eliminating the risk of erroneous witness testimony leading to miscarriages of justice.

Procedure For TIPs

The procedure for conducting a Test Identification Parade includes critical steps that will ensure fairness and reliability. Usually, the parade is performed by police or magistrate, there is usually a preferred option of a magistrate to in order to maintain impartiality. There are times that judicial magistrates may be indicated to do this at a prison due to the process being performed fairly and on a similar basis freeing of outside influences.

During the parade, the identification witness is asked to identify the suspect from a line up of people. The line up contains the accused suspect and some non-suspects. The non-suspects should have similar physical attributes of the suspect. The non-suspects are important to ensure there is no outside influence affecting identification and that the witness will identify the accused based on recollection of the crime scene [4]and also to support the reliability of the identification. There for fairness, exists also in the line up non-suspects whose physical attributes are the same characteristics as the accused.

The witness also should the identification should not be discriminatively affected by the accused and identifying influenced in the evidence free from bias. Non-suspects should be identified for matching general appearance of the accused, for example: height, age and face; take care not to provide any advantage or disadvantage.

The accused cannot be compelled to attend the Test Identification Parade unless directed by the courts. Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, allows for the admission of identification evidence, but does not require the accused to be present[5]. However, a Court may issue a direction under section 54A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if it is necessary to secure an attendance order for the accused to assist the investigation.

It is important to identify where this discretion is situated within the scheme of the law, protecting the rights of the accused while providing a comprehensive examination. Overall, the process is developed to provide a fair and accurate means of identification for an accused such that the process is carried out free of prejudice, whilst protecting the rights of the accused and the witness.

The spontaneity of the identification must be preserved in order to prove that the accused was identified on the basis of witness's memory directly from the time of occurrence. There should be no marks or tag or any other special feature shall be placed on the body of accused during the TIP.

The accused would be blended with other individuals who possess similar body or physical feature as the accused in the proportion of 9:1 or 10:1. In case the accused is not willing to submit to the TIP then the concerned police officer may approach the magistrate under section 54a, crpc to order or force the according to undergo the same. Simply, in the grounds that TIP has not been performed yet, the bail application of accused cannot be rejected by court.

TIP can be performed after the few days when crime had been committed. In case of Anil Kumar vs State of U.P[6], where TIP was performed 47days after the arrest. But the court held that 'since the identifying witness was attacked by the assailant. These were the conditions which would have left an impression in the memory of witness. The facial expression of assailants would not be erased within the time frame of 47 days'.[7]

Evidentiary Value of TIPs

TIP is not a substantive piece of evidence before the Law and may only be used as corroborative or contradictory evidence of the witness concerned as given in the Court. If the TIP is done within a police station or before the police or investigating officer, it has no value. It is the duty of the police officer to ensure they properly complete the investigation before a judicial magistrate or executive magistrate and the police officer should ideally not be present when identification is taking place.

In State of H.P. v. Prem Chand[8], the Supreme Court has held that a test identification parade is not an obligation where the witness is already aware of the accused and can identify them in the court of law. Notably, if there is a pre-existing knowledge of the accused, a test identification parade is not even obligatory[9]. If the witness knows the accused by it name or knows already, it is meaningless to ask for gram TIP, rather they will simply recollect and state name and identify the accused before the court.

This is a case of 'Direct identification.' The Supreme Court in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Punjab [10]reiterated the principle laid down in the case of Prem Chand, and noted that when a witness is familiar with and can identify the accused in the courtroom, then it is unnecessary to hold a test identification parade. If the witness saw the accused commit the crime and did not know them before it, then it is a case of 'circumstantial identification', and TIP are only relevant in this case. Again, in actual evidence in such a case is not TIP, rather the identification is made in the court, or at the stage of trial. The test identification parade works to corroborate the identification made in the court.

For a corroborative piece of evidence under section 157 of Indian evidence act. The test identification parade is only carried out at the stage of investigation. The Supreme Court in Dana Yadav v. State of Bihar [11]reiterated its earlier stipulation that the only purpose of test identification parade is to corroborate the court identification of the accused. Test Identification Parade is seen as ancillary to the identification during the trial. The witness is to identify the witness is made to identify the accused in the course of investigation as soon as possible accused has been arrested.

Challenges and Considerations.
The reliability of witness identification during a Test Identification Parade is significantly influenced by various factors related to the timing and circumstances of the crime. For instance, if a crime occurs under stressful conditions, such as a high-pressure or traumatic situation, the witness's ability to accurately recall details may be compromised[12]. This is because stress can impair memory and perception, leading to potential inaccuracies in the witness's account.

Additionally, lighting conditions, distance from the perpetrator, and the presence of distractions can also affect the witness's perception and memory of the event. If the crime happened during the day in a well-lit area, the witness may have had a clearer view of the perpetrator, potentially leading to a more reliable identification. Conversely, if the crime occurred at night or in a crowded environment, the witness's ability to accurately identify the perpetrator might be reduced due to poor visibility or competing stimuli.

Furthermore, ensuring that witnesses do not communicate with each other before the parade is another critical consideration. This is essential to maintain the integrity of the identification process. If witnesses discuss their experiences or descriptions of the perpetrator, it could lead to contamination of evidence, where one witness's recollection is influenced by another's account. This could result in false or misleading identifications, undermining the reliability of the Test Identification Parade. To prevent this, investigators must take stringent measures to keep witnesses separate and prevent any opportunity for them to discuss the case before participating in the parade.

This measure helps preserve the independence of each witness's testimony and ensures that the identification is based solely on their individual memory of the event, rather than being influenced by external factors. By controlling these variables, the Test Identification Parade can provide more reliable evidence and help ensure a fair investigation. Additionally, maintaining the separation of witnesses also helps to prevent any potential biases or suggestions that might arise from shared discussions, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the entire process.

Conclusion
In summary, the Test Identification Parade is an important instrument in criminal investigations, helping to confirm the accuracy of witness identifications and assist the prosecution in court. Although it is not substantive evidence by itself, it is useful corroborative evidence that can reinforce a witness's testimony. The process is to display a lineup of people, with the suspect and others who resemble them, before witnesses who will be required to identify the culprit. The integrity of the process is critical and entails precautions such as isolating witnesses from one another to avoid contaminating evidence.

The credibility of witness identification can be affected by the timing and conditions of the crime, such as illumination, and the level of distraction. Hence, the parade should be conducted immediately after the arrest and strict procedures should be followed to ensure equity and accuracy. As limited as it may be, the Test Identification Parade is an integral part of the criminal justice system, and it serves to eliminate mistaken identifications and protect against wrongful convictions. Its use comes in its power to reduce investigations and lay a foundation for additional legal actions, ultimately aiding in the dispensation of justice.

End-Notes:

• Abhishek Sahu, Understanding of Test Identification Parade, https://blog.ipleaders.in/understanding-test-identification-parade/, (July 25, 2021).
• Ramkishan vs Bombay State, AIR 1955 SC 104
• De facto judiciary, https://www.defactojudiciary.in/notes/test-identification-parade-in-evidence-act, (May 18, 2024).
• Batuk Lal, Law of Evidence, 73, (24th ed. 2023)
• Abhishek Sahu, Understanding of Test Identification Parade, https://blog.ipleaders.in/understanding-test-identification-parade/, (July 25, 2021)
• Anil Kumar vs State of U.P., 2003
• V.P. Sarthi, Law of Evidence, 97, (8th ed. 2023)
• H.P. v. Prem Chand, AIR 2003 SC 708
• Aishwarya Aggarwal, Test Identification Parade, https://lawbhoomi.com/test-identification-parade/, (Oct 28, 2023)
• Ramesh Kumar v. State of Punjab, AIR 1988 SC 1011
• Dana Yadav v. State of Bihar, AIR 2002 SC 3325
• Abhishek Kumar, Test Identification Parade: An Evaluation Through Judicial Pronouncements, its Utility and Veracity, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4414175, (April 10, 2023)