Kolkata: Observing that failure to exhibit the Test Identification Parade sheets during trial does not erode the credibility of the identification during trial, Calcutta High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of two accused in a gangrape case.
The bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Gaurang Kanth was moved by the two accused challenging the judgement and order of the trial court. In the case, the victim along with two other women were returning through a field when two men blocked their way demanding money. When they expressed inability to pay, they detained the victim and another woman who later managed to escape. The victim was taken to a wheat field and gangraped. Later, she was rescued by the villagers.
The defence counsel argued that medical report of the victim does not bear injury marks which makes a case of forced rape improbable. It was also contended that Test Identification Parade sheets were not exhibited and identification of the appellants in court by the victim and other witnesses is unreliable.
Prosecution argued that all the witnesses have identified the appellants in court. Though not exhibited, Test Identification Parade sheets are present in the records of the case. Therein it is recorded the appellants were identified by witness. Absence of injury cannot rule out rape. In its judgement, the court remarked that “the case portrays the pitiable condition of a working woman from marginalised section”.
The bench observed that the victim was a defenceless lady and the accused were able-bodied men. Due to their physical prowess, the victim was overpowered and as a result, no injuries were caused in her private parts.
With regard to identification of the accused, the court said witnesses saw the accused when they caught hold of them in a public thoroughfare. They had ample opportunity to see the miscreants and identify them during trial. “Identification in court is substantive evidence. Failure to exhibit the Test Identification Parade sheets during trial does not erode the credibility of the identification during trial,”
the court observed.