1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1695 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant V/s. Jaywant Ukhardya Savara & ors ..Respondents Smt.U.V.Kejariwal, A.P.P, for the State None for the respondents CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 8TH AUGUST, 2008 P.C. . Heard. 2. In the night of 24th May, 2004 at 3.00 A.M the complainant, his wife and brother-in-law were sleeping at his farm house. He woke up on hearing sound of window and went to see. He saw three persons in the hall and two had caughthold his brother-in-law, they were armed with knife. Subsequently, the complainant having seen pistol pointed his air gun to those accused persons. The matter was reported to police. The accused were came to be arrested in some other offence and on the basis of description in Exh.31 police officer 2 showed the accused Haresh Sutar and Jaywant Savara to the complainant and having confronted to them he confirmed that those were the two persons who had barged his house in the late night. The learned Judge noticed that the complainant admitted in his cross examination, before entering into the witness box police had shown the accused persons while they were alighting from the jeep. The learned Judge also did not approve the manner in which P.W.9 Vilas Padvi conducted identification parade in the jail relating to the accused. Since nothing was stolen from the complainant consequently, there was no question of any recovery of stolen property from any accused. It is only identification by the complainant who has claimed crucial role in the matter. The findings recorded by the learned Judge while acquitting the accused by the Judgment dated 7th December, 2007, in the set of above facts cannot be looked into with any other view than what the learned Judge observed. Hence, leave to appeal is rejected. (K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.)