1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3400 OF 2008. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms.Mamta R. Warma, Adv. For applicant; Mr.PM Shinde, APP for State. ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 4th August, 2009. ... 1) Heard Counsel extensively. 2) The rejection of prayer for custody of the vehicle is subject of challenge. The learned Judge, based on the record, found that on the date of the offence, the vehicle was not in the name of the petitioner, it has been transferred on the very next day. The petitioner has been cited as an accused in Crime No. 40/2006. The applicant has purchased the vehicle from one Shaikh Anis Shaikh Nathu and it is transferred in his name on 3rd of July, 2006. 3) In the above scenario, I do not see there is any mistake on the part of learned 2 Additional Sessions Judge in not entertaining the request for custody of the vehicle in question. Criminal Application disposed of accordingly. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/cran3400.08