LI Network
Published on: 25 August 2023 at 17:57 IST
The Supreme Court has clarified that conducting a Test Identification Parade (TIP) does not contravene Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, the Court stated that an accused cannot refuse to participate in a TIP based on the argument of coercion, as participation in such a procedure does not constitute a compelled act of self-incrimination.
The Court’s observation came in response to an appeal involving a murder conviction. A key point of contention was whether an accused could decline participation in a TIP during the course of an investigation, asserting that Article 20(3) protects a person from being compelled to be a witness against themselves.
In its decision, the Court highlighted Section 54A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which deals with the identification of arrested individuals when necessary for an investigation.
This section empowers courts, at the request of a police station’s officer-in-charge, to order an accused to undergo a TIP for identification.
The bench emphasized that after the introduction of this provision, an accused is obligated to stand for a TIP. However, the Court clarified that this obligation is not tantamount to compelling an accused to provide self-incriminating evidence.
The Court underscored that an accused’s participation in a TIP does not involve the production of evidence or a voluntary evidentiary act. While an accused can raise legitimate concerns about the legitimacy of the TIP or its evidentiary value during the trial, they cannot decline to participate solely on those grounds.
The Court ruled that an accused’s refusal to join a TIP does not exempt them from facing identification by witnesses during trial.
The decision reaffirms the distinction between compelled acts that constitute self-incrimination, protected by Article 20(3), and non-compelled actions like participation in a TIP.
