1 Cri. Appln. 3996.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3996 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ... Applicant V E R S U S Ashok @ Shakal S/o Lala Pawar and others ... Respondents ... Mr. V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for applicant-State. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. DATED : 1ST DECEMBER, 2009 PER COURT 1] The applicant-State has filed the present Application seeking leave to file Appeal against the acquittal of the respondents-accused for the offences punishable under section 395 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code as recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge-2, Jalna by judgment dated 7.8.2009 in Sessions case no. 1 of 2009. 2] We have heard learned A.P.P. for the State, with whose assistance we have perused the 2 Cri. Appln. 3996.2009 findings recorded by the trial Court. It appears that the evidence against the present respondents comprises of the evidence of P.W. 9 Devidas Gadhe, Executive Magistrate, Ambad who had conducted the test identification parade. The trial Court has rejected the evidence of the test identification parade on the ground that the accused after their arrest had been shown to the witnesses. Coupled with this the test identification parade had been held after a considerable delay and which delay had not been explained by the prosecution. The second piece of evidence comprises of the seizure of a gold ring at the behest of the original accused no.1 from the jeweller P.W. 12 Amol Udavant. It appears that on the information furnished by the original accused no.1 the gold ring came to be recovered from P.W. 12 Amol Udavant. However, P.W. 12 Udavant failed to identify accused no.1 who had sold the gold ring. In that light of the matter, therefore, the trial Court found that there was no credible evidence for sustaining the charge punishable under section 395 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. 3 Cri. Appln. 3996.2009 3] Upon hearing learned A.P.P. for the applicant-State and perusing the findings recorded by the trial Court, according to us there is no merit in the Application and the Application deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the Application is dismissed. Leave refused. Sd/- Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.) arp