52 Cri.Appeals 516, 281 n 468 of 2012.odt rt memorandum Exhibit 64 given by Accused No.3 to discover gold C ou ring and recovery Panchanama of gold ring Exhibit 65. Nothing could be elicited in his cross­examination to disbelieve his testimony. 59. It is pertinent to note that test identification parade ig h was conducted by PW­22 Naib Tahsildar in respect of gold ring and Aniket identified gold ring Exhibit 26 as the same ring which H was gifted by his friend Damodhar. Mohammed Mubin (PW­16) was a witness on identification Panchanama of gold ring recorded He too supports the ba y by Tahsildar Bharaskar vide Exhibit 67. identification of gold ring by Aniket at the time of test identification before Executive Magistrate. om 60. Further it was revealed during investigation that Accused Jawedkhan had to pay some dues to Ram Bodkhe and B against the payment of dues Accused Jawedkhan had given gold ring article 26 to Ram Bodkhe. Prosecution through the evidence of Complainant, Panch witnesses and Investigating Officer has proved that gold ring recovered at the instance of Accused No.3 Ram Bodkhe was given to him by Accused No.1 Jawedkhan and the said ring was gifted to Aniket by his friend Damodhar. ::: Uploaded on - 08/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2016 19:36:29 :::