51 Cri.Appeals 516, 281 n 468 of 2012.odt rt from the shop. He identified gold ring article 26 as the same ring shattered in the cross­examination. C ou sold from their shop. The evidence of PW­29 Ashok could not be Through his evidence prosecution could prove that gold ring article 26 given to Aniket was purchased from the shop of R.C.Bafna. According to prosecution gold ring article 26 was ig h 57. recovered at the instance of Accused No.3 Ram Bodkhe. During H investigation Accused No.3 Ram Bodkhe was interrogated. He showed his readiness to produce gold ring. Memorandum of ba y Accused Ram Bodkhe was recorded vide Exhibit 64 in the presence of Panch witnesses. Then at the instance of Accused Ram Bodkhe gold ring was recovered from the room of electric om motor in Tulsi Chambers. The gold ring was kept below a brick in the room. It was seized under Panchanama Exhibit 65. P.I. B Borse has duly proved recovery Panchanama of gold ring and identified the gold ring article 26 as the same ring recovered on the basis of information given by Accused Ram Bodkhe. 58. Another witness PW­15 Asif Mohammad Akbar was examined on recovery of gold ring at the instance of Accused No.3 Ram Bodkhe. ::: Uploaded on - 08/03/2016 He sticks up to his evidence regarding ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2016 19:36:29 :::