Dastagir Sab & Anr. v. State of Karnataka — TIP dispensed with where witness had prior familiarity with the accused

Part of the Forensic Docket on Legal Desire Forensics — a conviction confirmed through final appeal, kept here as a method-of-crime record.

The facts

The victim had seen the accused on three occasions almost immediately before the offence was committed, including at the time she was sexually assaulted by them, giving her direct first-hand familiarity with their appearance.

Her father and brother received a description of the accused from her, and when the accused were caught by the father, they confessed their guilt but refused to accompany him.

The investigating officer showed the accused to the victim before their formal arrest, to make sure the right persons had been apprehended, and the accused were also named in the FIR.

On these facts, under Section 9 of the Evidence Act, 1872, the Supreme Court held that a formal Test Identification Parade was not necessary in the circumstances, and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction.

Status: conviction upheld through final appeal.

Why this belongs in the Forensic Docket: Reinforces that a Test Identification Parade is dispensable where the victim already had genuine, first-hand familiarity with the accused from before the offence — the TIP exists to test memory, not to manufacture a formality where none is needed.

Case details

Read the full judgment (PDF), sourced from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (AWS Open Data Registry, CC-BY-4.0).

Explore more in the Forensic Docket or browse the full Forensics hub.