BARKAT ALI ZAIDI,J. - (1.) THE applicant in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks termination of proceedings pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha J.P. Nagar (Crime No. 5459 of 2003) under Sections 392, 412 I.P.C. and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
(2.) I have heard Sri V.K. Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Maurya, Additional Government Advocate for the State. There were five witnesses of identification in relation to three robberies said to have been committed by the applicant and his accomplices during the course of the same night, one out of them was an Assistant Station Master, Kaphoorpur, who lodged the F.I.R. but he did not appear in the identification parade. The other four witnesses did not identify the applicant. The contention of the applicant's Counsel, therefore, is that the charge of robbery would be unjustifiable because no witnesses identified the applicant at the identification parade.
(3.) THE contention is justified and must be upheld because identification of an unknown dacoit or robber in Court without prior identification by the witness at the identification parade is of no value. There is hardly any scope for controversy on this aspect. The Trial for robbery, if it proceeds would be only a farce. The charge under Section 392 I.P.C. should, therefore, be quashed.;