(20) S.C.No.463/2009 (Judgment) witnesses turned hostile the recovery of said articles cannot be said to be proveds on the said testimony of investigator, he being an interested witness. For this purpose, Advocate Shri Barlota has relied on the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court, in the case of “Rajkumar Vs. State, reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 1322”. 42/­ Thus Advocate Shri Barlota has argued that in this case also the recovery panchas on the recovery of gold ring at the instance of accused Ram Bodkhe turned hostile and therefore, such recovery cannot be considered and hence he argued that accused Ram Bodkhe be acquitted. 43/­ As against said submissions and the rulings sited on behalf of accused, APP Shri Mugadiya has strongly argued that even though recovery panchas do turn hostile, still the evidence of I.O can be considered and the hostility of the witness is not a reason to vitiate the recovery effected by Police Officer. For this purpose, APP Shri Mugadiya has relied on the ratio laid down by Division Bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of “Nana @ Dnyaneshwar v. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2004(2) B.Cr C 638”.