AIROnline 2025 SC 89

(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.395, S.397— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.9— Dacoity – Identity of accused – Allegation that accused stopped bus at gunpoint and then robbed all passengers after beating them , with help of four other co-accused already travelling in bus – Witnesses who participated in TIP were not examined during trial, rendering TIP report inadmissible for corroboration or contradiction – Only substantive evidence in respect of identification of accused was dock identification by a police personnel – Said witness could not satisfactorily explain his movement in bus and was not included in TIP process despite having seen accused before the incident – Dock identification by a solitary witness, that too a police personnel, failed to inspire confidence – Prosecution failed to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt – Accused was entitled to acquittal.
AIROnline 2018 CHH 1100-ReversedAIR 1972 SC 102-FollowedAIR 1988 SC 345-Followed

(Para 14
15
16
17)

(B) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.395— Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.156— Dacoity – Appreciation of evidence – Arrest of accused – Prosecution case rested primarily on testimony of a police constable, who claimed to ….