42 Another witness (PW­19) Ravindra Murlidhar Bahule rt 41. Cri.Appeals 516, 281 n 468 of 2012.odt mobile. He identified mobile C ou was a police constable in the team formed for detection of stolen article 25 and supported Panchanama of recovery of mobile. Since Accused No.2 Pradip Chandaliya has not seriously disputed that mobile was recovered importance. He 42. was not cross­examined by Accused H Nos.1 and 3. ig h from him by Police the evidence of P.C. Bahule is not of much According to prosecution, mobile which was seized ba y from Accused No.2 Pradip Chandaliya was identified by complainant PW­7 Aniket as of Mansi. Test identification parade in respect of mobile was conducted by PW­22 Datta Bharaskar. om Mr. Datta Narhari Bharaskar (PW­22) was Naib Tahsildar attached to Tahsil Office, Aurangabad. On 28th June, 2009, letter B Exhibit 90 was received by him from P.I. Borse of Jinsi Police Station for conducting identification parade of Muddemal. The evidence of this witness shows that he conducted identification parade in respect of gold ring, clothes and mobile. Aniket identified gold ring and clothes belonging to him and mobile as of Mansi. TIP Panchanamas were duly proved by Mr. Bharaskar. ::: Uploaded on - 08/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2016 19:36:28 :::