Memorandum of ID parade not a genuine doc: HC

Bombay High Court has recently ruled that a memorandum of test identification parade submitted by a magistrate cannot be considered as a ‘genuine’ document.

The HC has also directed a sessions court in Pune to summon an Executive Magistrate to depose as a prosecution or court witness in a cheating case.

The observation was made by a single-Judge Bench presided over by Justice Sadhana Jadhav, while hearing a plea of Rajesh Shirke and two others. Shirke and his associates were charge-sheeted for dacoity, cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy.

The trio were accused of having impersonated as officials from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and looted an amount of Rs 21,30,000 from the house of Sohrab Kayani.

During investigations, a test identification parade was conducted by the Executive Magistrate, who had prepared its memorandum. The said memorandum was forwarded to the Sessions Court that was trying the case. The admissibility of the memorandum was challenged by the accused as the Executive Magistrate was not examined by the prosecution.

After considering all the material on record, Justice Jadhav said, “This court is of the opinion that a memorandum of test identification parade will not be a document as contemplated under Section 80 of the Indian Evidence Act.”

Section 80 states that a court shall presume a document genuine and true, if that document is produced before any court, purporting to be a memorandum of the evidence, given by a witness before any law officer and signed by any Judge or Magistrate.

Justice Jadhav said, “It would not be possible for any court to presume that the circumstances in which the test identification parade was held are beyond reasonable doubt, as to whether the contents of the memorandum as ascribed by the Executive Magistrate can be held to be true and genuine.

“Thus, it would be in the interest of justice to examine the Executive Magistrate as a court witness. The trial court shall summon the Executive Magistrate and record his evidence, as far as possible, within 60 days, calling upon him to prove the memorandum and record his evidence,” Justice Jadhav said.