HKSAR v. THAPA MANISH AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. THAPA MANISH AND ANOTHER

Despite some procedural breaches and imperfect resemblance among actors, the parade was conducted fairly within the Manual's requirements, any breach (escort/notification) caused no actual prejudice, defendants were given opportunity to exclude actors and to object after modifications, and therefore identification evidence from the parade is admissible.

Citation
[2021] HKDC 1187
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Defendant: THAPA Manish; Defendant: PUN Kishna
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 2021
Case Number
DCCC611/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal: Wounding With Intent; Common Assault / Ruling on Admissibility of Identification Parade
Outcome
Identification parade evidence admitted as fair and admissible
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Admissibility of Identification Parade, Visual Identification, Force Procedures Manual Compliance
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Police Procedure Identification Parade Procedure Identification Evidence Admissibility of Identification Parade Visual Identification Force Procedures Manual Compliance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

THAPA Manish

Defendant

PUN Kishna

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal: Wounding With Intent; Common Assault / Ruling on Admissibility of Identification Parade

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the identification parade was conducted fairly
  2. 2 Whether the selection and appearance of actors provided sufficient resemblance to the suspects
  3. 3 Whether two suspects could be paraded together

Ratio Decidendi

Despite some procedural breaches and imperfect resemblance among actors, the parade was conducted fairly within the Manual's requirements, any breach (escort/notification) caused no actual prejudice, defendants were given opportunity to exclude actors and to object after modifications, and therefore identification evidence from the parade is admissible.

Court Disposition

Identification parade evidence admitted as fair and admissible

Orders

  • Identification parade identification evidence admitted