FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 245 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 245 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 245 OF 2006 IN IN IN CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Smt.V.R.Bhosale APP for applicant CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. MHATRE,J. MHATRE,J. DTAED: DTAED: DTAED: 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Application for condonation of delay allowed for reasons mentioned therein. Cri. Application accordingly disposed of. ... FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Smt.V.R.Bhosale APP for appellant CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& V.G.PALSHIKAR Acg.C.J.& SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. MHATRE,J. MHATRE,J. DTAED: DTAED: DTAED: 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Considered the application for leave to appeal on merit. After marshalling the facts as disclossed by the evidence on record, the learned Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution evidence is not of such reliable as to be enough to fasten guilty against the accused persons. The order is well reasoned order. Evidence is properly appreciated. Hence no interference is called for. Hence application for leave rejected. ....