There is no bar for investigating agencies on employing technical tools to conduct a further investigation for identifying offenders, a Delhi court has observed while rejecting the bail plea of an accused in a northeast Delhi violence case on the ground of conducting digital identification instead of the doing judicial test identification parade.
Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav dismissed the bail plea of Mohd Arif observing that charges against the applicant are serious in nature and said, "considering the facts and circumstances of the case in totality vis-avis gravity of offence, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is accordingly dismissed."
Arif is facing charges dealing with an attempt to murder and various other sections of the Indian Penal Code and other provisions in the violence case in Dayalpur, which is being probed by the Crime Branch of the Delhi Police.
During the course of the hearing, special public prosecutor Amit Prasad submitted that the digital identification of the applicant has been made at the scene of the crime in the video of a witness.
However, defence counsel Mehmood Pracha took a strong exception to the digital identification of the applicant on the ground that the same is impermissible in law after the filing of chargesheet, whereas, Prasad emphasized that no new material has been added, but with the use of technology only the process of identification has been changed.
"In my prima facie view, there is no bar in investigating agency employing technical tools to conduct further investigation and I am fortified in my view by the judgment reported in the case titled as, State of Rajasthan V/s Vikramjeet Singh," the order said.
Defence counsel has sought bail on the ground that the applicant Arif was never subjected to judicial "test identification parade" either by the alleged eye witness or by the constable.
The court observed that the applicant was clearly visible in the CCTV footage, carrying a "stick" in his hands and also seen damaging the CCTV camera.
The photographs of the applicant have also been captured by video footage and he has been categorically identified by constables on duty, also the location of the mobile phone of the applicant has been found to be at the scene of the crime on the date of the incident and he was in touch with the other accused persons in the matter, the court noted.
"In my considered opinion, we are at "pre-cognizance/pre-committal stage" in the matter and at this stage, the Court considering the bail matter has to consider the material collected by the investigating agency at its face value and at this stage, "mini trial" cannot take place. Even the issue of TIP, whether it was required in the matter or not shall be considered at the stage of the trial," the order said.
It said that the public witnesses in the matter are residents of the same locality and the possibility of the applicant threatening or intimidating them if released on bail at this stage cannot be ruled out.
( With inputs from ANI )
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor