43 Cri.Appeals 516, 281 n 468 of 2012.odt Except some rt He was cross­examined at length by Accused. remained consistent throughout on TIP. 43. C ou minor contradictions and omissions, the evidence of Mr.Bharaskar The evidence of Naib Tahsildar is corroborated by PW­16 Mohammed Mubin Mohammad Abbas. PW­16 ig h Mohammed Mubin proved identification of mobile handset of Mansi by Aniket and its identification Panchanama Exhibit 68. The other important witnesses on recovery of mobile H 44. are PW­31 Ganesh Pawar and PW­33 Sachin Bhadange. ba y PW­31 Ganesh Ramrao Pawar was serving in Bharti Air­Tel company as Nodal Officer. The company was providing mobile services to customer. It is stated by Ganesh Pawar that on om 2nd July, 2009, Aurangabad Police demanded certain information on E­mail. E­mail was received from the office of Commissioner B of Police, Aurangabad. Details of mobile telephone No.9503667292 were demanded by Police for the period 12 th June, 2009 to 21st June, 2009. Accordingly details were given to Police pertaining to said mobile. This witness had given detailed information in respect of the calls made, from which number calls were received, time of ::: Uploaded on - 08/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2016 19:36:28 :::