1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3635 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2009. The State of Maharashtra. ... ... Applicant. Versus Sagar Rakjkumar Kesi & Ors. ... ... ... Respondents. Mr. A. S. Gadkari, APP for the Applicant. None for the Respondents. CORAM : J. N. PATEL and A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 17TH DECEMBER, 2009. P. C.: This is an application for leave to appeal filed on behalf of the State aggrieved by the decision of the learned First Ad­hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No. 38 of 2007 which came to be decided on 24th December, 2008. 2. It was the case of the prosecution that in between the night of 8th November, 2006 and 9th November, 2006 at about 1.30 a.m. some thieves broke open the lock put on the shutter of Indian Motors, opened the glass showcase 2 and took away therefrom certificate of Authorised Dealership issued by Hero Honda Company and also took away cash amount of Rs.12,000/­ from the drawer of one table. All the accused were residents of Nepal and came to be arrested from their place of residence at Kolhapur in India. The prosecution has led direct as well as indirect evidence in support of their case. The factum of robbery has been duly established by the prosecution. But the prosecution was not able to prove that it is the Respondents/Accused who were the robbers as the witnesses to the incident in their cross­examination clearly admitted that the accused persons have sped away from the spot by taking advantage of the darkness and that they had not seen the accused persons prior to the incident and that no description of the accused persons were given when their statement under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code came to be recorded and that after the suspects were arrested in the case by the Police Officer of Juna Rajwada Police Station, the police had called the witnesses and informed that they have arrested all the accused persons and shown the suspects to them which according to the police were involved in the act of committing theft. With this admission on the part of the witness, the learned trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused. Therefore, we do not find any error or illegality committed on the part of the learned trial Court in acquitting the accused persons. 3 3. We, therefore, reject this application seeking leave to file appeal. As a consequence thereof, the criminal appeal also stands dismissed. Sd/­ (J. N. PATEL, J.) Sd/­ (A. A. SAYED, J.)