text
stringlengths 1.93k
19.2k
|
|---|
I, Dhananjay Singh aged about 52 years son of Shri Sudeshwar Prasad Singh resident of Village – Takkarganj, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, Education – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/ prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his brother on 04.04.2024 at 21.31 hours by the informant namely Smt. Shabina Bano wife of Abdul Rahman resident of Village – Takkarganj, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 180 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident dated 25.03.2024. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 04.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 04.04.2024, the husband of the informant namely was working in the shop of the applicant and due to certain reasons he left the shop of the applicant and started working in another shop due to which the applicant and his brother has enmity with him. On 25.03.2024 aroun 11.30 hours, the applicant and his brother came to nearby the house of the informant and abusing, when the applicant and his brother was restrained by the husband of the informant, the applicant provocked his brother to assult the husband of the informant. That the alleged incident took place on 25.03.2024 while the informant lodged the first information report against the applicant and his brother on 04.04.2024 i.e. after 10 days, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the injured was brought to the hospital, where the medical was conducted on 25.03.2024 and only one injury shown. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the injured dated 25.03.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 10.04.2024 in which the informant repeated her first information report version and tried to implicate the applicant in said case crime, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 10.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the concerned police also recorded the statements of the sons of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., who also reapted the version of the first information report and on the basis of the same, the Section 323, 308 of I.P.C. deleted by the Investigating Officer and Section 307 of I.P.C. added on 17.04.2024. That later on, the husband of the informant died on 26.04.2024 thereafter the Investigating Officer started the investigation of the case crime under Section 302 of I.P.C. only vide CD No. 8 dated 01.05.2024. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police of the District – Prayagraj on 27.04.2024. That the body of deceased was brought for conducting post mortem on 27.04.2024 at S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj, where the post mortem was conducted and the cause of the death ascertained as ‘Infection in both lungs”. The photocopy of the post mortem report dated 27.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the death of the deceased not collobrated with the injury report as well as the statements of the informant and witnesses. The deceased died due to lungs infection not from the head injury. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the applicant surrendered before the learned court below in connection with the said case crime and the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the concerned police regarding the recovery of the alleged brick, which was used in the alleged murder, was recovered from the pointing of the brother of the applicant on 16.05.2024 after 42 days of the alleged incident. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 16.05.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the real story is that the applicant and his brother were running a shop in the name of Vansh Art, where the deceased was working. That the deceased was ill as such he asked the applicant and his brother for inhancement of his salary and when the same was not inhanced, the deceased leave the work from the applicant’s shop. That after leaving the shop of the applicant, the relation of the applicant & his brother was very good with the deceased, however, the informant and other family members were no happy with the applicant and his brother. That on 25.03.2024, the Holi festival was being celebrated during the said celebration, the deceased was met with an accident with a bike and sustained injuries on his head. That on call, the applicant was also went to the hospital with the deceased from the village to District Prayagraj. That the deceased was died during his treatment due to accident but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for her self-satisfaction lodged the first information report against the applicant and his brother after knowing everything about the incident, while they have not committed any offense as alleged against them. That the applicant has no concerned with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has been falsely implicated in another case bearing Case Crime No. 268 of 2023 lodged under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.c. at Police Station – Amethi, District – Amethi, in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 24.11.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the co-accused of the case crime namely Rishabh Singh moved an application bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 8135 (B) 2024 before this Hon'ble High Court, which has been allowed by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 29.07.2024. The photocopy of the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2294 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 23.08.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2024 without committing any offense. That apart of the abovementioned case, the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 180 of 2024 under Section of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of his trial. |
I, Ram Khelawan aged about 32 years son of Shri Rameshwar resident of House No. 153, Mohalla – Nariyawaan, Police Station - Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Graduate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 256 of 2013 under section 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 201 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh on 27.08.2013 at 15:30 hours against the applicant/accused and 5 named & 3 unknown persons. The first information report is lodged by Smt. Mehrunnisha first wife of the deceased. The incident took place on 26.08.2013. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 27.08.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, on 26.08.2013 at about 06.30 P.M., the applicant/accused along with other accused of aforesaid case crime number have committed the murder of Mushaaq. She has further alleged in the first information report that the applicant/accused and other accused persons are be armed with Gun, Addhi, Katta, Kulhari, Farsa and Ballam. She has also alleged in the first information report, three unknown persons have also participated in the aforesaid crime. That in the first information report the informant further alleged that in order to save his life the deceased ran away towards southern side and the accused persons of the case crime have fired upon the deceased as a result of which, the deceased fell down. The informant/wife of deceased and her brother-in-law namely Maksood have raised the alarm as result of which, the accused persons have taken the deceased towards southern side. That in the morning on the search, the body of the deceased was found in a pond near by the machine of Jai Ram. That the inquest on the body of the deceased was conducted on 27.08.2013. The photo/typed copy of the inquest report dated 27.08.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem on the body of the deceased was done on 27.08.2013 at 10:30 P.M. in District Hospital, Pratapgarh. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased has received lacerated wound along with abraded contusion and two fire arm injuries with one incised wound. It is further submitted that the no punctured wound has been found on the body of the deceased. The photo/typed copy of the post mortem report dated 27.08.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the challan lash was also prepared in the form No. 13 and from the perusal of the challan lash it is evidently clear that the time of lodging of the first information report is not mentioned. The photo/typed copy of the challan lash prepared by the investigating officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the site plan was also prepared by the investigating officer on 27.08.2013 and from the perusal of the site plan it is evident that while the informant was present at the place ‘A’ her husband/deceased was surrounded by the accused persons at the place ‘B’. It is further said that at place of ‘B’ the deceased has got the injuries and his body has been found at the place of ‘X’. The distance between the place ‘A’ and ‘B’ is said to the 85 stem while from the place ‘B’ to place ‘X’, where the body of the deceased was found, is measured as 20 steps. The photo/typed copy of the site plan prepared by the investigating officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That on 27.08.2013, the same day of occurrence, the statement of the informant Mehrunnisha was recorded by the investigating officer and she has not specified any weapon in the hand of the applicant/accused. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 27.08.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That later on 05.10.2013 the subsequent statement of the informant was again recorded by the next investigating officer and she has stated therein almost similar fact without specifying any weapon in the hand and roll of the applicant/accused. The typed copy of the subsequent statement of the informant dated 05.10.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That on 28.08.2013, the statement of the brother of the deceased namely Mohd. Maqsood son of Mustqeem has been recorded by the investigating officer. The typed copy of the statement of the brother of the deceased dated 28.08.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That later on 05.10.2013, the statement of the second wife of the deceased namely Pinki was recorded by the investigating officer. The typed copy of the statement of the second wife of the deceased dated 05.10.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this Affidavit. That the applicant/accused was also arrested by the concerned police on 31.08.2013 and sent to the jail. That during the course of the investigation, the investigating officer has recorded the statement of namely Nizam son Mohd. Ayyub and Qayyum son of Ehtesham Ali on 05.09.2013, in which, they have stated that the accused persons named in the first information have committed that offence with the help of firearms and danda. It is also submitted that the witnesses Nizam and Qayyum have not stated that any person was armed with Kulhari, Farsa and Ballam. The typed copy of the statement of the witnesses Nizam and Qayuum dated 05.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this Affidavit. That it is also submitted that the during the course of the investigation, the investigating officer has recorded the statements of Smt. Tarawati wife of Harish Chandra, Shri Karan son of Bhagwan Das, Smt. Furkela wife of Late Ram Samujh, Shyam Lal son of Ram Autar and Ram Lal son of Sukal Das, in which, they have stated that co-accused Hari Lal has been falsely impleacted in the present case and he has not participated in the crime. The typed copies of the statement of the witnesses dated 05.09.2013 are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 11 to this Affidavit. That the deceased was hardened criminal and he had formed a gang of his own. He was also been challaned under the Gangster Act vide case crime No. 155 of 2002, under section 3(1) Gangster Act at Police Station - Jethwara and the case was going on. That the deceased was involved in numbers of cases. As per criminal history of the deceased was challenged in the following cases:- Case crime No. 361 of 1994 under section 302, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station – Lalganj Case Crime 197 of 1985 under section 379, 323 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 169A of 1996 under section 379, 323 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 108 of 2000 under section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 96 of 2001 under section 379, I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 02 of 2002 under section 2/3 U.P. Gunda Act, Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 92 of 2002 under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 452, 506 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 155 of 2002 under section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 121 of 2003 under section 2/3 U.P. Gunda Act, Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 62 of 2006 under section 394 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 273 of 1996 under section 353, 307 I.P.C., Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 276 of 1996 under section 25 Arms Act, Police Station – Jethwara Case Crime 76 of 2008 under section 25 Arms Act, Police Station – Jethwara That the deceased was bully in the society and he used to have bad eyes upon the girls and ladies of his village and also of neighboring villages. That the deceased was also challaned in the case of Gangster Act along with other accused namely Munnu Singh, Chandra Bhusan and Mulla alias Kaleem and first information report lodged against the deceased and other accused persons on 17.09.2002 under 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act. The typed copy of the first information report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this Affidavit. That from the facts and circumstances of the case it appears nobody has seen the occurrence and the deceased was done to death in the night. That the body of the deceased was found in the morning as alleged by the prosecution, but the first information was lodged on 27.08.2013 at 15:30 hours. The distance of the place of occurrence than that of Police Station is 9 KMs. This is crystal clearly shows that nobody has seen the occurrence and the deceased was done to death at some unknown place. Even the body of the deceased was taken from the place of occurrence and it was kept in the front of the house of the deceased on a cot. That no blood or any incriminate article has been found from the place of occurrence to suggest that the deceased was done to death near the tube well. That the part of the story has been found false in as much as, that the charge sheet has not been submitted against the Hari Lal Pal alongwith there is similar allegation in the first information report, as well as, in the statement of the witnesses. That the deceased was aged about 45 years of the aged as he has bad eyes upon the girls and ladies, he has forcefully solemnized the Nikah with a Hindu girl namely Pinki, who is aged about 25 years. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of forged and planted eyewitness and evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the deceased was hardened criminal and have several enemies due to his bad habit because of the he had bad eyes upon the girls and ladies of his village and also of neighboring villages and as well as involve the several crimes, some unknown persons murdered the deceased but due to land dispute with the applicant-accused and his family member, the informant got a golden chance to falsely implicate the applicant/accused and his other family members in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 31.08.2013. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 20.08.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 20.08.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Triloki aged about 38 years son of Shri Radheshyam resident of Village – Pure Jodha, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 526 of 2014 under section 302 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 19.10.2014 at 08:45 hours, in which the applicant is not named. The first information report is lodged by brother-in-law of the deceased namely Shri Rajaram. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 19.10.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the accused persons namely 1. Virendra Yadav son of Ramhesh Yadav and 2. Awadhesh son of Chhote Lal resident of Pure Jodha, Post – Janeshwarganj, Tahsil & Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh having bad eye on deceased. On night of 18/19.10.2014 the accused persons murdered the deceased after rape of deceased. That the body of the deceased was send for the post mortem on 20.10.2014 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh wherein the post mortem was done by doctors. The photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 20.10.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post mortem report the five injuries found on the body of the deceased as below: An abrasion of size 2.5X0.5 CM reddish blue in color in front of Rt. side of face 6.5 CM lateral to chin. An abrasion of size 0.5X0.5 CM reddish blue in color is on Rt. side of chin. An abrasion of size 1.5X0.55 CM blue in color in an left side of chin An Abrasion of size 3.5X0.5 CM reddish blue in color at left of neck. An abrasion of size 2.5X0.5 CM reddish blue in color on Rt. side of chin 7.5 CM lateral to neck. That the applicant is not named in first information, during the investigation the name of the applicant came in light, in statement of the Bihar Lal Yadav and Mohan Lal Yadav. The witnesses stated that the applicant was generally goes to the deceased home and called regularly, they also alleged the applicant having physical relation with the deceased. The type copy of the statements of the Bihar Lal Yadav and Mohan Lal Yadav are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the Awadhesh Yadav, who is named in first information report not charge sheeted on the basis of the statement of the Bihar Lal Yadav and Mohan Lal Yadav and they are relative and also have enmity with the family of the applicant, due to which the witnesses falsely implicated in the crime in question. That the deceased was auntie of the applicant and there has no any chance to have physical relation with deceased as alleged by the witnesses. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. therein he clearly stated that the accused persons, who is named in the first information report are committed the crime in question. The typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That two other witnesses namely Ramesh Chandra and Suresh Maurya have recorded their statement before the concerned police and both are also stated that on 19.10.2014, at early morning when they were going to his field for watering, they have seen the accused Virendra Yadav and Awadhesh Yadav, who is named in first information report, running from the house of the deceased after committing the crime in question. The typed copies of the statements of the witnesses namely Ramesh Chandra and Suresh Maurya are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the investing officer submitted the charge sheet before the court concerned on 30.03.2015 without considering the fact and reality of the case. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under section 302 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and false motive which given in case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since …………………. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 07.05.2015. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 07.05.2015 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Smt. Suman Devi aged about 51 years daughter of Shri Amar Bahadur Singh wife of Shri Rajesh alias Lallu Singh resident of Mohanganj, Vikrampur, District - Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education –Illiterate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the wife/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the unknown persons on 11.05.2023 at 08.46 hours by the informant namely Phoolchandra Singh son of Ram Dular Singh resident of Village - Pure Khusai, Mohanlalganj, Police Station - Leelapur, District - Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 130 of 2023 under Section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Leelapur, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident dated 10.05.2023. The certified copy of the first information report dated 11.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 11.05.2023, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the Mama of the informant namely Shiv Shankar Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was murdered on the night of 10.05.2023 at a liquor shop by unknown persons. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 11.05.2023 in the presence of several persons. That the body of the deceased was brought to the P. M., Pratapgarh for conducting the post-mortem on 11.05.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘shock and hemorrhage”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 11.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 11.05.2023 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and he did not name the applicant or anyone. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 11.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. Tha just two days after the lodging of the first information report i.e. on 13.05.2023, the further statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police, in which the informant named the applicant and another person. The informant himself admitted that there was no enmity with the applicant and he also did not know, why the applicant murdered his Mama as alleged by him. The typed copy of the further statement of the informant dated 13.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That on 14.05.2023, the applicant and another accused of the case crime were arrested by the concerned police, without any rhyme and reason in connection with the case crime and a recovery memo has been prepared. The typed copy of the arresting memo of the applicant and another dated 14.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That on a bare perusal of the arrest memo, the applicant and another were questioned by the concerned police and their statements have been recorded, in which another accused stated that he brutally beaten the deceased and on the night he went to confirm the death of the deceased. The co-accused did not say that the applicant was also involved in the commission of the case crime. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 14.05.2023 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the arrested accused and applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the arrested co-accused and applicant dated 14.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the arrested co-accused and applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 14.05.2023 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police and the statement of the co-accused changed in comparison to the arresting memo. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the real story is that the applicant, informant & co-accused are residents of the same village and they known to each other. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was not a good person and he had a lot of enemies in the village and outside and he fought on several occasions with several known & unknown persons in a drunken stage. That on 10.05.2023, the deceased, the applicant and the co-accused were at the liquor shop along with several other persons but they were not together. However, they formally met with each other at that place. That the applicant and co-accused after having drinks left the liquor shop and thereafter, what happened at the liquor shop or anywhere else, the applicant has no concerns. That on 11.06.2023 the deceased was murdered by some unknown persons due to their enmity but due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination that if the applicant and co-accused had beaten the deceased at the liquor shop and no one saw the said incident. That thereafter, the investigating officer of the case crime, submitted charge sheet No. 119 of 2023 against the applicant and another on 19.06.2023 under Section 302 of I.P.C.. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Leelapur, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2672 of 2023 before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Pratapgarh and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 28.09.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 28.09.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 14.05.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 130 of 2023 under Section 302 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Leelapur, District – Pratapgarh, in the interest of justice. |
I, Prema Devi aged about 50 years wife of Sri Ram Badan resident of Village – Manau Ka Purva Hamlet of Mauli, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is mother of applicant and also doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 23 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 15.01.2015 at 18:30 hours, against the applicant and one other person namely Ram Badan, who is the father of the applicant. The first information report is lodged by father of the deceased namely Shri Shri Algu Ram. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 15.01.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter Geeta Devi (hereinafter referred to as deceased) was solemnized around five years ago and the family members of the applicant were tortured on his daughter for dowry. Thereafter a compromise was taken place between the applicant and deceased on 11.01.2010 as they would live happily but on 12.01.2015, the applicant along with his father murdered his daughter and his body throw in well. That the informant also stated as the body of deceased was recovered in presence of him by the concerned police on 12.01.2015 but after three days after consultation with his well-wishers, he lodged a first information report against the applicant/accused and his father on 15.01.2015 on wrong and baseless facts, without giving any explanation for delay. That the informant was present at the time of the preparation of the inquest report, which was prepared by the concerned police on 13.01.2015 and all “Panchan” given their opinion as the deceased has been died due to drowning, in said inquest the informant himself present and appointed as “Panchan”. The photo/type copy of the inquest report dated 13.01.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the applicant himself informed to the concerned police in regard to said incident on 13.01.2015 and also he was appointed as “Panchan”. That the body of the deceased was send for the post mortem on 13.01.2015 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh wherein the post mortem was done by doctors. The photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 13.01.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That according to the post mortem report the three injuries found on the body of the deceased as below: Contusion of 1.5cmX1cm midline of fore head, 7cm above just of nose. Abrasion of .08cmX0.7cm I front of left knee joint. Multiple abrasion in area of 4cmX3cm in front of left leg, just below left …………. That as per post mortem report the cause of death is “asphyxia as a result of anti-mortem drowning.” By bare perusal of the post mortem report it is crystal clear that the nature of the injuries caused over the body of the deceased were simple and caused during falling in the well not by beaten as alleged by the informant. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner but soul of the first information report in his statement. That the photocopy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the real fact is this, marriage of the applicant with deceased solemnized in year 2007 and after wedlock of both, the deceased born a child in year of 2009, thereafter some misunderstanding were arisen and same has been resolved and a compromised has been executed 11.01.2010 between the parties concerned. That after said compromise everything was good and life the of applicant and deceased smoothly running but on 12.01.2015 around 7-8PM the deceased went to well to drinking water when she took more time, then applicant came out then he saw, in meantime the deceased was fallen down in well when she was pulling the water from the well, when the alarm was raised by him then the villagers were come at incident spot and the after that the deceased was pullout from the well but there was too late, she was died. That informant was informed by the applicant in regard to misshaping and the informant along with other persons come at the house of the applicant and they are also present at time of inquest report and he was himself become “Panchan”. That the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet before the court concerned on 27.02.2015 bearing No. 05 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 without considering the fact and reality of the case. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question, when he was happy with the deceased and no any issue between the deceased and applicant in regard to dowry as alleged by the informant. That the first information report has been lodged by the informant after legal consultation in result of same the marriage of the deceased with applicant tried to established around 5 years old whereas the marriage of the applicant with deceased solemnized in year 2007. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under section 302 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and false motive which given in case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 17.01.2015. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail but the same has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Pratapgarh on insufficient grounds vide order dated 11.09.2015. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 11.09.2015 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Kamlesh Kumar Yadav aged about 33 years son of Shri Gajadhar Prasad Yadav resident of Village – Salempur Dadaura, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 328 of 2014 under section 302 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Salon, District – Raibareilly on 04.06.2014 against the accused and another one. The first information report is lodged by Shri Lal Ji Yadav. The incident took place on 03.06.2014. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 04.06.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, on 03.06.2014 near about 11:30 PM, the dispute arose between the applicant/accused persons and deceased Raj Bahadur, the both accused beaten the deceased, during this the Raj Bahadur died. That the first information report lodge by the ex village pradhan. That the statement of informant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 04.06.2014 by the investigating officer. The informant repeat his first information report version in detailed and reveals the two eyewitnesses names. The type copy of the statement of the informant under section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Shri Mangal Dhobi recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 04.06.2014 by the investigating officer. The type copy of the statement of the eyewitness under section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Smt. Premlata wife of Daya Ram Yadav recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 04.06.2014 by the investigating officer. The type copy of the statement of the eyewitness under section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased done on 04.06.2014 at District Hospital, Raibareilly. As per post mortem report the cause of death of the deceased is shock and hemorrhage as Antimortem injuries. The true photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 04.06.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the first information report lodged against the two persons. After the investigation, the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant and another accused in court concerned on 27.06.2014. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the applicant or any accused. That the investigation officer recovered the murder weapon on 07.06.2014 only showing the good work of the police department. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of forged and planted eyewitness and evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the deceased was heavy drinker and have several enemies due to this habit because of the he was borrowed the money from several persons and they are always demanding the money from the deceased. That the informant, who is the former village pradhan, was also have enmity with the applicant due to village peshbandi in the election of pradhan. Due to aforesaid reason he has falsely implicate the applicant in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant is respectable person of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant is in Jail since 07.06.2014. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 07.08.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 07.08.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Kamlesh Kumar Yadav aged about 33 years son of Shri Gajadhar Prasad Yadav resident of Village – Salempur Dadaura, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 328 of 2014 under section 302 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Salon, District – Raiberelly on 04.06.2014. The first information report is lodged by the Lal Ji Yadav. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 04.06.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, the deceased has Tata Magic registration No. UP 32 DN – 3659 and same was operated by the deceased. When on 24.01.2014 the deceased was not come to home then the complaint start searching him. Next morning i.e. 25.01.2014 at 05.30 AM the body of complaint’s brother was found on the seat of driver of his own vehicle at Bhadchak – Dandauli road near Mahauta. There were multiple gun shots injuries shown on the body of the deceased and blood was oozing and some gun shots are also found on front of vehicle. That the complaint lodge the first information report on the suspicious ground due to old enmity with the father of applicant and another person namely Kamlesh. That the first information report lodge against the applicant and three other persons on the suspicious and baseless ground. That the statement of complaint recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on the same day. The compliant supported the first information report version. The type copy of the statement of the complaint under section 161 Cr.P.c. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased done on 26.01.2014 at , Pratapgarh. As per post mortem report the cause of death of the deceased is comuama and hammarage and shock as a reamly of Antimortem fire arms injury. The true photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 26.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That after two days on 27.01.2014, after lodging the first information and giving the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the complaint recorded his further statement (Mazeed Bayan) before the investigation officer and build a new prosecution story and stated, time of the incident, one witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo (brother-in-law of the brother of deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel) is present and see the incident. That as per information given by the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo the compliant stated in his further statement that at the time of incident, when the multiple gun shots are fired by the accused persons, at the same time one accused had also injured by the gun shot during the firing but the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo not identified the injured accused, while the Dinesh Kumar alias Baloo indentified the all four accused by name. The type copy of the further statement (Mazeed Bayan) dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the brother of the deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel also recorded his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. before the authority concerned on 27.01.2014 and stated on 24.01.2014 at the incident place, the deceased and all four accused person are chatting with together and when he ask to the deceased about the meeting then the deceased replies everything is fine and supporting the further statement of the complaint. The type copy of the statement of brother of the deceased dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the son of the deceased namely Amarjeet Patel also recorded his statement before the investigating officer on 27.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C. and also supported the statement of his uncle statement namely Krishna Kumar Patel. There was no any change in the both statements except style of stating his statements. The type copy of the statement of son of the deceased Krishna Kumar dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the so called eye witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo recorded his statement before the investigation officer on 29.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C.. The so called eye witness stated in his statement, he was present at the time of the incident i.e. 08.30 PM of 24.01.2014. The so called eye witness identified the accused persons. The type copy of the statement so called eye witness dated 29.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the so called eye witness stated in his statement, the applicant has been shouting/encourage to other accused for killing to the deceased. That the applicant is surrendered before the C.J.M., Pratapgarh on 24.03.2014 and applicant sent to jail. That the first information report lodged against the four persons. After the investigation, the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant and two other persons in court concerned on 05.05.2014. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the applicant or any accused. That a contradiction in the statement of the so called eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at that time. That the so called eyewitness has seen the incident at the dark and foggy night of the cold weather, which is highly suspicious. That the so called eyewitness is not disclose the about the incident to anyone till the crimination of the deceased, this is also highly suspicious and same is planted eyewitness after the post mortem of the deceased. That the investigation officer recovered the Rifle only showing the good work of the police department. That the recovery of the Rifle is highly suspicious and contradictory because of the aforesaid Rifle is licensed to the mother of the applicant and the same was never used by the applicant. That the applicant is student and perusing his B.A.. That the so called eyewitness is stated in his statement he identified the accused persons and during the firing the one accused was injured. But all accused presently in District Jail, Pratapgarh and has not received any fire arm injury. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement. That the so called eyewitness stated in his statement he saw the incident in the front light of the Tata Magic but he not reveal which accused fired his fire arm on the deceased. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of forged and planted eyewitness and evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are respectable persons of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicants are in Jail since 13.02.2014. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.05.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 29.05.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Dhananjay Singh aged about 52 years son of Shri Sudeshwar Prasad Singh resident of Village – Takkarganj, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, Education – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/ prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the unknown persons on 04.04.2024 at 21.31 hours by the informant namely Smt. Shabina Bano wife of Abdul Rahman resident of Village – Takkarganj, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 180 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident dated 25.03.2024. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 04.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 04.04.2024, the husband of the informant namely was working in the shop of the applicant and due to certain reasons he left the shop of the applicant and started working in another shop due to which the applicant and his brother has enmity with him. On 25.03.2024 aroun 11.30 hours, the applicant and his brother came to nearby the house of the informant and abusing, when the applicant and his brother was restrained by the husband of the informant, the applicant assaulted by brick upon the husband of the informant. That the alleged incident took place on 25.03.2024 while the informant lodged the first information report against the applicant and his brother on 04.04.2024 i.e. after 10 days, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the injured was brought to the hospital, where the medical was conducted on 25.03.2024 and only one injury shown. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the injured dated 25.03.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 10.04.2024 in which the informant repeated her first information report version and tried to implicate the applicant in said case crime, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 10.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the concerned police also recorded the statements of the sons of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., who also reapted the version of the first information report and on the basis of the same, the Section 323, 308 of I.P.C. deleted by the Investigating Officer and Section 307 of I.P.C. added on 17.04.2024. That later on, the husband of the informant died on 26.04.2024 thereafter the Investigating Officer started the investigation of the case crime under Section 302 of I.P.C. only vide CD No. 8 dated 01.05.2024. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police of the District – Prayagraj on 27.04.2024. That the body of deceased was brought for conducting post mortem on 27.04.2024 at S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj, where the post mortem was conducted and the cause of the death ascertained as ‘Infection in both lungs”. The photocopy of the post mortem report dated 27.04.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the death of the deceased not collobrated with the injury report as well as the statements of the informant and witnesses. The deceased died due to lungs infection not from the head injury. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the applicant surrendered before the learned court below in connection with the said case crime and the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police on 11.05.2024 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the concerned police regarding the recovery of the alleged brick, which was used in the alleged murder, was recovered from the pointing of the applicant on 16.05.2024 after 42 days of the alleged incident. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 16.05.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the real story is that the applicant and his brother were running a shop in the name of Vansh Art, where the deceased was working. That the deceased was ill as such he asked the applicant and his brother for inhancement of his salary and when the same was not inhanced, the deceased leave the work from the applicant’s shop. That after leaving the shop of the applicant, the relation of the applicant & his brother was very good with the deceased, however, the informant and other family members were no happy with the applicant and his brother. That on 25.03.2024, the Holi festival was being celebrated during the said celebration, the deceased was met with an accident with a bike and sustained injuries on his head. That on call, the brother of the applicant namely Himanshu Singh was also went to the hospital with the deceased from the village to District Prayagraj. That the deceased was died during his treatment due to accident but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for her self-satisfaction lodged the first information report against the applicant and his brother after knowing everything about the incident, while they have not committed any offense as alleged against them. That the applicant has no concerned with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1503 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 11.07.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 11.07.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 03.05.2024 without committing any offense. That the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 180 of 2024 under Section of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of his trial. |
I, Babban Singh aged about 25 years son of Samar Bahadur Singh resident of Dadauli, Post – Raghauli, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – High School, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant No. 2 and Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 07 of 2014 under section 302 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh on 25.01.2014. The first information report is lodged by the brother of deceased namely Dev Prasad Patel. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 25.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, the deceased has Tata Magic registration No. UP 32 DN – 3659 and same was operated by the deceased. When on 24.01.2014 the deceased was not come to home then the complaint start searching him. Next morning i.e. 25.01.2014 at 05.30 AM the body of complaint’s brother was found on the seat of driver of his own vehicle at Bhadchak – Dandauli road near Mahauta. There were multiple gun shots injuries shown on the body of the deceased and blood was oozing and some gun shots are also found on front of vehicle. That the complaint lodge the first information report on the suspicious ground due to old enmity with the father of applicant and another person namely Kamlesh. That the first information report lodge against the applicant and three other persons on the suspicious and baseless ground. That the statement of complaint recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on the same day. The compliant supported the first information report version. The type copy of the statement of the complaint under section 161 Cr.P.c. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased done on 26.01.2014 at , Pratapgarh. As per post mortem report the cause of death of the deceased is comuama and hammarage and shock as a reamly of Antimortem fire arms injury. The true photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 26.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That after two days on 27.01.2014, after lodging the first information and giving the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the complaint recorded his further statement (Mazeed Bayan) before the investigation officer and build a new prosecution story and stated, time of the incident, one witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo (brother-in-law of the brother of deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel) is present and see the incident. That as per information given by the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo the compliant stated in his further statement that at the time of incident, when the multiple gun shots are fired by the accused persons, at the same time one accused had also injured by the gun shot during the firing but the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo not identified the injured accused, while the Dinesh Kumar alias Baloo indentified the all four accused by name. The type copy of the further statement (Mazeed Bayan) dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the brother of the deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel also recorded his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. before the authority concerned on 27.01.2014 and stated on 24.01.2014 at the incident place, the deceased and all four accused person are chatting with together and when he ask to the deceased about the meeting then the deceased replies everything is fine and supporting the further statement of the complaint. The type copy of the statement of brother of the deceased dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the son of the deceased namely Amarjeet Patel also recorded his statement before the investigating officer on 27.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C. and also supported the statement of his uncle statement namely Krishna Kumar Patel. There was no any change in the both statements except style of stating his statements. The type copy of the statement of son of the deceased Krishna Kumar dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the so called eye witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo recorded his statement before the investigation officer on 29.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C.. The so called eye witness stated in his statement, he was present at the time of the incident i.e. 08.30 PM of 24.01.2014. The so called eye witness identified the accused persons. The type copy of the statement so called eye witness dated 29.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the so called eye witness stated in his statement, the applicant has been shouting/encourage to other accused for killing to the deceased. That the applicant is surrendered before the C.J.M., Pratapgarh on 24.03.2014 and applicant sent to jail. That the first information report lodged against the four persons. After the investigation, the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant and two other persons in court concerned on 05.05.2014. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the applicant or any accused. That a contradiction in the statement of the so called eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at that time. That the so called eyewitness has seen the incident at the dark and foggy night of the cold weather, which is highly suspicious. That the so called eyewitness is not disclose the about the incident to anyone till the crimination of the deceased, this is also highly suspicious and same is planted eyewitness after the post mortem of the deceased. That the investigation officer recovered the Rifle only showing the good work of the police department. That the recovery of the Rifle is highly suspicious and contradictory because of the aforesaid Rifle is licensed to the mother of the applicant and the same was never used by the applicant. That the applicant is student and perusing his B.A.. That the so called eyewitness is stated in his statement he identified the accused persons and during the firing the one accused was injured. But all accused presently in District Jail, Pratapgarh and has not received any fire arm injury. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement. That the so called eyewitness stated in his statement he saw the incident in the front light of the Tata Magic but he not reveal which accused fired his fire arm on the deceased. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of forged and planted eyewitness and evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are respectable persons of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicants are in Jail since 13.02.2014. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.05.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 29.05.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Anil Kumar Yadav aged about 32 years son of Shiv Kumar Yadav resident of Pachmahua deah Mahmadpur Bhav, Pratapgarh, Mahmadpur Bhaon, Police Station – Baghrai, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Class 8th, Occupation – Private Job, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the Brother/Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application accused/applicant before this Hon'ble Court & no any other bail application preferred by the of accused/applicant in same crime no is either by this Hon'ble Court of Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad That the First Information Report has been lodged on 20.11.2022 at 01:04 O' clock by the informant namely Ranjana Pal in Case Crime No./FIR No. 0302/2022, U/S-147/302/120-B/506 1.P.C. at Police Station- Baghrai District-Pratapgarh regarding the incident. dated 18.11.2022 at 20:000' clock against the 8 accused persons regarding murder of her father by shooting him with a pistol. The Certified/typed copy of First Information Report dated 20.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.1 to this affidavit. That according to prosecution story is that on 18.11.2022 at 8:00 pm. night the above named accused persons came to the house of the informant and when the father of the informant came out of the house, the said persons took him away saying that they were a party. In the morning the informant came to know that his father's dead body was lying on a canal 400 meter away from the village. The accused persons by shooting with pistols regarding the land dispute, there is a delay of approximately 2 days in filing the first information report. That during the course of investigation the investigating officer has recorded statement co-accused Ramesh Chandra Pal under section 161 Cr.P.C on 23/11/2022 at 19:26 clock. That the basis of statement of co-accused, applicant was implicated as accused on the basis of wrong evidence found of the above mentioned cases and on the basis of hearsay without proper investigation. That on 20.11.2022 the statement U/S-161 Cr.P.C. of informant namely Ranjana Pal was recorded by the investigating officer and in her statements she has. repeated the version of the prosecution story of the first information report. It is further mentioned here that the statement given by the informant name of the applicant/accused not mentioned. The typed copy of statement U/S-161 Cr.P.C. of informant dated 20.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.2 to this affidavit. That the statement of the co-accused namely Ramesh Chandra Pal was recorded by investigating officer U/S-161 Cr.P.C. on 23.11.2022 in which role of firing has been assigned to applicant and accused Pankaj mishra. The typed copy of Statement U/S-161 Cr.P.C. of co-accused namely Ramesh Chandra Pal dated 23.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.3 to this affidavit. That the Co-accused Ramesh Chandra Pal statement 161 Cr.P.C recorded by the investigation officer on 23.11.2022 CD No-2, Rapat No-62 at 19:26 clock. That the arrest of the applicant/accused and one other accused on 23.11.2022 at 23:30 clock. Recovery shown of 2 tamancha (katta) 315 bore applicant/accused and one other accused,no independent eye witness present at the time of recovery. That the recovery memo dated 23.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.4 to this affidavit. That the father of the informant was examined by the Dr. Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, M.O. CHC Kunda Pratapgarh, on 19.11.2022 at 1:00 P.M. and in the postmortem report as per X-Ray show 02 Bullet received from body (i) 01 Bullet (Rt.) side mid of (Rt.) ear and (Rt.) upper mandible. (ii) 2nd Bullet from lover end of (Rt.) chest just 10.0cm below to (Rt.) nipple and the cause of death has been mentioned as death due to shock and homerrage due to antimortem fire arm injury. The Photocopy/typed copy of P.M. report dated 19.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.5 to this affidavit. That as per F.I.R the alleged incidence relates to dated 18.11.2022, post mortem was conducted on 19.11.2022, while the first information report has been lodged on 20.11.2022. without any explanation 2 days delay lodging First Information Report. That thus, from the aforesaid facts, it becomes clear that the accused/applicant has been falsely implicated the alleged crime in question based on the botched-up investigation conducted by the investigating officer Stutents of blindly believing the false and fabricated statement of co-accused. That the above mentioned statements of the informant there is no any evidence against the accused/applicant and the accused/applicant in custody on basis of co-accused statement, as has been recorded by the investigating officer and the police have prepared false. Report against the accused/applicant for creating the gravity of the case. That the investigating officer has submitted the charge-sheet against applicant and 2 other accused U/S-302/120-B/506 I.P.C, 3/25 Arms act, and final report has been submitted against rest 6 accused persons, which itself creates whole prosecution story highly doubtful. That there is no material in the first information report to show or even any apprehension that the accused/ applicant would either try to abscond/evade during investigation or influence the witnesses in any manner. That the accused/applicant is,not named in the first information report and on the basis of,statement of co-accused false and fabricated story his name has been developed in the present case. That the applicant is law abiding person and he has movable and immovable property, there is no apprehension of expounding or tampering the witnesses. It is further submitted that there is no any criminal history against the present applicant. That the applicant has falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime and he has no criminal history ever. That the accused/applicant is innocent and without committing any offence he is in jail since 23.11.2022. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That there are much contradiction between the allegation of the first information report, statement of the informant and other collected material of the evidences. That the accused/applicant has not committed any offence and without committing any offence he is in jail. That the accused/applicant is ready to furnish his bail bonds if bail is granted by this Hon'ble Court. That the accused/applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail if bail is granted by this Hon'ble Court. That the bail application of accused/applicant rejected on 31.05.2023 by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge room No- 6, Pratapgarh in vide Bail Application no. 1385/2022 without application of his judicial mind. The Free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 31.05.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above noted fact, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble may kindly be pleased to enlarge the applicant on bail in relation to Case Crime No. 302 of 2022, under Sections 302, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/25 Arms act related to Police Station – Baghrai, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of his trial, in the interest of justice. |
I, Rakesh Kumar Shukla aged about 50 years son of Ram Krishna Shukla resident of Village – Balla Laru, Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the uncle (Bade Papa)/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the unknown persons on 12.07.2022 at 01.20 hours by the informant namely Smt. Aakanskha Chandra daughter of Late Prem Chandra Yadav resident of E-2/661, Vinit Khand, Gomiti Nagar, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 265 of 2022 under Sections 302, 394 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident dated 11.07.2022. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 12.07.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 12.07.2022, the father of the informant namely Prem Chandra Yadav (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was OLA driver and on 10.07.2023 he left his house around 08.00 PM and when he did not return to home. On 11.07.2022 around 08.12 AM, the informant received a call from the concerned Police Station, who informed that the father of the informant had been murdered and his body found. That the body of the deceased was brought to the P. M., Pratapgarh for conducting the post-mortem on 11.07.2022, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘Asphyxia”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 11.07.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the post-mortem of the deceased does not collaborate with the prosecution story. As per the post-mortem report, the time of the death of the deceased was 17.30 hours to 23.30 hours on 10.07.2022, while as per the confessional statement, the applicant murdered the deceased at 03.00 hours on 11.07.2022. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 12.07.2022 in which the informant repeated her first information report version and some additional supportive facts. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 12.07.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That a forged and fabricated arresting-cum-recovery memo was prepared by the concerned police on 18.07.2022 and showed that the applicant was arrested by them and also recovered Wagon R car and other belongings. The typed copy of the arresting/recovery memo dated 18.07.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That during the time of preparation of the arrest/recovery memo, Sections 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC IPC have been added to the case crime by the investigating officer. That it was very strange that in the last third line of the arresting-cum-recovery memo stated as “QnZ dk etcwu i<dj lqukdj loZ lEcfU/kr ds gLrk{kj cuk;s tk jgs gSa” and in the last time stated “QnZ dh izfr vfHk;qDr dks nh x;h ftls xqLls esa QkMdj dj Qsad fn;kA” If the said memo was destroyed by the applicant then how the team has been put their signature on the same, and if second has been prepared then it has not mentioned in the memo, meaning thereby the said memo is anti dated and time. That the confessional statement of the applicant has been written/ prepared by the investigating officer as per his wish and tried his best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not given any confessional statement. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 18.03.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the confessional statement of the applicant was recorded by the concerned police on 18.07.2022 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the investigating officer in the instant case and his confessional statement and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statement. That the investigating officer has no any independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because the applicant has not committed any offense. The investigating officer concocted the story and stated that the applicant had confessed his guilt during his arrest. That it was also interesting the applicant stated in his confession that he had thrown the number plate of the vehicle in the Ganga River but the cloths containing the blood of the deceased had been carried by him since 11.07.2022 in the recovered vehicle. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the concerned police regarding the recovery of the alleged murder weapon by the applicant has murdered the deceased after well thought, then there is no chance of keeping the recovered murder weapon. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 18.07.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the real story is that a first information report dated 16.05.2022 bearing case crime No. 178 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366 of IPC has been lodged at Police Station - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh, in which the applicant was named. That on 18.07.2022, the applicant was arrested with the girl and thereafter the investigating officer, prepared a arresting-cum-recovery memo on 18.07.2022, on which the applicant and recovered girl put their signature. That, when the Investigating Officer of Case crime No. 178 of 2022 was informed regarding the recovery of the girl and the arrest of the applicant, both investigating officers, conspired against the applicant and concerned police for showing his good work, destroyed the original arrest-cum-recovery and two separate forged and fabricated memo have been prepared by showing different place and time and the applicant has falsely implicate in aforesaid case crime. That thereafter, the investigating officer of the case crime, submitted charge sheet No. 260 of 2022 against the applicant on 27.08.2022 under Sections 394, 302, 411, 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the investigating officer for extraneous reasons, falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and the allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 394, 302, 411, 420, 465, 468, 471 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 643 of 2023 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 1, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 13.03.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 13.03.2023 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 18.07.2022 without committing any offense. That the applicant is also named in case crime No. 178 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and 3, 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 of IPC has been lodged at Police Station - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 265 of 2022 under Sections 394, 302, 411, 420, 465, 468, 471 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in the interest of justice. |
I, Babban Singh aged about 25 years son of Samar Bahadur Singh resident of Dadauli, Post – Raghauli, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – High School, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant No. 2 and Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 07 of 2014 under section 302 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh on 25.01.2014. The first information report is lodged by the brother of deceased namely Dev Prasad Patel. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 25.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, the deceased has Tata Magic registration No. UP 32 DN – 3659 and same was operated by the deceased. When on 24.01.2014 the deceased was not come to home then the complaint start searching him. Next morning i.e. 25.01.2014 at 05.30 AM the body of complaint’s brother was found on the seat of driver of his own vehicle at Bhadchak – Dandauli road near Mahauta. There were multiple gun shots injuries shown on the body of the deceased and blood was oozing and some gun shots are also found on front of vehicle. That the complaint lodge the first information report on the suspicious ground due to old enmity with the father of applicant and another person namely Kamlesh. That the first information report lodge against the applicant and three other persons on the suspicious and baseless ground. That the statement of complaint recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on the same day. The compliant supported the first information report version. The type copy of the statement of the complaint under section 161 Cr.P.c. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased done on 26.01.2014 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh. As per post mortem report the cause of death of the deceased is comuama and hammarage and shock as a reamly of Antimortem fire arms injury. The true photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 26.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That after two days on 27.01.2014, after lodging the first information and giving the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the complaint recorded his further statement (Mazeed Bayan) before the investigation officer and build a new prosecution story and stated, time of the incident, one witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo (brother-in-law of the brother of deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel) is present and see the incident. That as per information given by the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo the compliant stated in his further statement that at the time of incident, when the multiple gun shots are fired by the accused persons, at the same time one accused had also injured by the gun shot but the Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo not identified the injured accused, while the Dinesh Kumar alias Baloo indentified the all four accused by name. The type copy of the further statement (Mazeed Bayan) dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the brother of the deceased namely Krishna Kumar Patel also recorded his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. before the authority concerned on 27.01.2014 and stated on 24.01.2014 at the incident place, the deceased and all four accused person are chatting with together and when he ask to the deceased about the meeting then the deceased replies everything is fine and supporting the further statement of the complaint. The type copy of the statement of brother of the deceased dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the son of the deceased namely Amarjeet Patel also recorded his statement before the investigating officer on 27.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C. and also supported the statement of his uncle statement namely Krishna Kumar Patel. There was no any change in the both statements except style of stating his statements. The type copy of the statement of son of the deceased dated 27.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the so called eye witness namely Dinesh Kumar alias Babloo recorded his statement before the investigation officer on 29.01.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C.. The so called eye witness stated in his statement, he was present at the time of the incident i.e. 08.30 PM of 24.01.2014. The so called eye witness identified the accused persons. The type copy of the statement so called eye witness dated 29.01.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is surrendered before the C.J.M., Pratapgarh on 13.02.2014 and applicant sent to jail. That as a matter of fact nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicant and whatever recovery of the Rifle has been shown on his pointing out on 20.02.2014 by the investigation officer is totally false and baseless. The above recovered Rifle is licensed to the mother of applicant namely Smt. Rekha Singh and same were revered from applicant’s house. The photo copy/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 20.02.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That after the recovery of the aforesaid Rifle, the investigation officer added the new section 25/27 of Arms Act on 20.02.2014. That the first information report lodged against the four persons. After the investigation, the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant and two other persons in court concerned on 05.05.2014. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the applicant or any accused. That a contradiction in the statement of the so called eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at that time. That the so called eyewitness has seen the incident at the dark and foggy night of the cold weather, which is highly suspicious. That the so called eyewitness is not disclose the about the incident to anyone till the crimination of the deceased, this is also highly suspicious and same is planted eyewitness after the post mortem of the deceased. That the investigation officer recovered the Rifle only showing the good work of the police department. That the recovery of the Rifle is highly suspicious and contradictory because of the aforesaid Rifle is licensed to the mother of the applicant and the same was never used by the applicant. That the applicant perusing B.A. I year from M. A. S. Degree College, Shekhpur Ashik, Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That the so called eyewitness is stated in his statement he identified the accused persons and during the firing the one accused was injured. But all accused presently in District Jail, Pratapgarh and has not received any fire arm injury. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement. That the so called eyewitness stated in his statement he saw the incident in the front light of the Tata Magic but he not reveal which accused fired his fire arm on the deceased. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of forged and planted eyewitness and evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are respectable persons of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are in Jail since 13.02.2014. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.05.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.05.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Vinod Kumar aged about 40 years son of Shri Ram Kishun resident of Village – Muhilamau, Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the 2 persons including the applicant on 19.03.2022 at 17.35 hours by the informant namely Dharmendra under Sections 304 I.P.C. at Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli regarding murder of his brother namely Bipendra Yadav only on basis of wrong, false and presumption, with regard to incident dated 18.03.2022. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 19.03.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 19.03.2022 the brother of the informant namely Bipendra Yadav (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) alongwith his two friends went to the Mama’s house of the applicant on occasion of the Holi on 18.03.2022. When they were returning to home at that time the applicant and others hooted them and thereafter the applicant and others have beaten them and lastly the applicant trampled his tractor on head of the deceased due to which the deceased sustained head injuries and during the treatment he died on 18/19.03.2022 in KGMU, Lucknow. That the inquest report of the deceased body was prepared by the concerned police on 19.03.2022 in presence of several persons at KGMU, Lucknow. That the body of deceased was brought to the KGMU Mortuary, Lucknow for conducting post mortem on very same day i.e. on 19.03.2022, where the post mortem was conducted and the cause of the death ascertained as ‘anti-mortem head injuries”. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report dated 19.03.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 19.03.2022 in which the informant all most repeated his first information report version and stated that the applicant murdered the deceased, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 19.03.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on the applicant surrendered before court concerned on 28.03.202 in relation to the said case crime. That the investigating officer on 19.04.2022 recorded the statements of the two eyewitness namely Karan and Akash, who went with the deceased, said that the applicant and deceased earlier fight and having enmity with each other and on 18.03.2022, the applicant without any reason abusing the deceased and deceased was pushed before the tractor of the applicant by other co-accused and the applicant hit the deceased and run away from the incident place. The typed copy of the statement of the two eye-witnesses dated 19.04.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the informant that after trampling the tractor upon the head of the deceased by the applicant but he sustained only three injuries and was still alive. That the real story is that the applicant has no issue with the deceased as stated by the eye-witnesses of the case crime in their statement. That on 18.03.2022 was Holi and the applicant and others have enjoying the festival and as usual when the deceased and others were passing the applicant and others have thrown the colors upon them. That for the said reason, the deceased abused the applicant and others who were thrown the color upon him. The applicant tried to restrain the deceased for abusing as on Holi its happen usually but the deceased become aggressive and started manhandling with the applicant. That when the family members of the applicant came to know about said incident then they called back him to home alongwith his tractor. When the applicant started his tractor to returning his home, the deceased stand in front of tractor and was not giving pass to the applicant. That thereafter the friend of the applicant, who also named in the first information report, tried to side the deceased at that time he slipped and fallen and sustained the injuries and during treatment died. That thereafter on the basis of the legal advice, the applicant and others accused has been falsely implicated in the said crime case on 19.03.2022 without any rhyme and reason. That thereafter without proper investigation and without considering the fact of the case the charge sheet submitted against the applicant and another under Sections 304 of IPC on 24.04.2022 bearing charge sheet No. 148 of 2022. That the deceased sustained the injuries due to his own fault and arrogance but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime by the informant for his self-satisfaction. That due to malafide intention, the informant for his self-satisfaction lodged the first information report against the applicant, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is so far from the truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 304 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 28.03.2022 without committing any offense. That apart from aforesaid case crime, against the applicant, two other cases have been lodged against the applicant, which are as under: - Case Crime No. 207 of 2019 under Sections 147, 307, 325, 323, 504 of IPC and 3(2)(5) of S.C. & S. T. Act related to Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 14.11.2019 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 398 of 2019 under Section 2/3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act related to Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 20.01.2020 by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1064 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Raebareli and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 25.05.2022. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 25.05.2022 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. |
I, Mohd. Naseem aged about 27 years son of Khaleel Ahamad resident of Mauli, Police Station - Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the cousin brother of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this . No any other bail application pending before this or rejected by this . That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against applicant and three family members of the applicant on 18.12.2013 on 09:15 hours by the mother of the deceased namely Shahnaz Bano, under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act on the basis of wrong facts, mentioning the incident took place on 18.12.2013. The photocopy of the first information report dated 18.12.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That the informant stated in the first information report, the marriage of daughter of informant namely Nashreen Bano was solemnized with applicant on 07.01.2013 in District – Pratapgarh and expend the money according her capacity. Just after marriage, the applicant and his family member was demanding dowry as one Motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- and when the demand of the applicant and his family members hav not fulfilled in result of that they brutally murdered his daughter. That the after the marriage the deceased came in house of the applicant and she was short tempered lady, just after few days of marriage the deceased requested to the applicant to leave his house with him and residing separately with deceased because the applicant has sole bread earner of the family and his income was not much as the deceased think. When they leave the family then the earning of the applicant is little bit better for the deceased. That the applicant always denied for leaving his house and family members because he was sole bread earner of the family and without him the family members of the applicant has been ruined but the deceased always quarreled with the applicant for leaving the family member of the applicant and wants to settle with the applicant another place. That the when the applicant not ready to leave his house and family member, the deceased became annoyed and starts quarreled with mother and sisters of the applicant, who is also named in first information report. The deceased having the relation with another person, the applicant always stopping her for such type activity but she was not stopping, even always chatting over her mobile phone. That when the deceased has not stopped therefore the applicant destroyed the mobile phone of the deceased, then in her safeguard and public defamation of applicant and his family members, the deceased always shouting and rumoring as the applicant and his family members were demanding the dowry from the deceased. That the deceased day by day became aggressive and on 17.12.2013 the deceased demanded the mobile phone of the applicant to make call but the applicant denied for same and after taken food, he was go to sleep. The deceased as she was short tempered lady, she committed suicide in her room. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 18.12.2013 before Panchat and all are opined as the deceased was died due to hanging but for proper investigation the post mortem is necessary. That the post mortem was done on body of the deceased on 18.12.2013 in District Hospital, Pratapgarh at 4.45 PM. The photocopy of the post mortem report dated 27.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer on 18.12.2013 wherein the informant repeated the version of her first information report in detail. The type copy of the statement of informant dated 18.12.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the applicant belongs to very poor family and running vegetable shop on footpath, by which he earns only for livelihood money but the informant alleged the applicant and his family demanded one Motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- same is unbelievable. That charge sheet filed by the investigation officer on 12.02.2014 against applicant including his mother under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act. That the applicant has been surrendered before the court 15.08.2017 and moved the bail application before the court concerned and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 12.12.2014. The copy of the order dated 12.12.2014 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 15.08.2017 and has no criminal history. That investigating officer has not found any evidence against the other accused on the basis of statements of the spot witnesses. That the applicant was running vegetable shop for the survival/livelihood of his family members but the deceased always pressurized him to bring her to another and the deceased was always quarreled for this issue with the applicant but the economic status of the applicant has not allowed bringing the deceased to another place. That on date of incident i.e. 17.12.2013, the deceased was start quarreling with applicant and demanding the mobile phone after dined for same she run away in room and locked from inside and committed suicide. That on basis of said issue the deceased committed suicide and nothing was done by the applicant as alleged by the informant and proved the concerned police. That the applicant has no issue with the deceased in his life except above mentioned but the informant has lodged first information report on the wrong facts. That there is no any evidence found by the investigating officer in regard of demand of the dowry. After suicide of the deceased the informant cooked this story overnight. That the applicant is innocent and due to take revenge with informant falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That there is no any evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime and the only evidence against the applicant in regard of alleged offence is only false story and baseless ground, which was by the informant and the police. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That a false story cooked up by the concerned police and informant as the applicant committing the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and false motive, for the money, has been fabricated by the concerned police. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Durgesh Pratap Singh aged about 38 years son of Shri Brijendra Pratap Singh resident of Pure Purviyan Ka Purwa, Police Station - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 386 of 2023 lodged under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 23.10.2023 at 19.30 hours, against the applicant, his brother and his sister-in-law (Bhabhi). The first information report is lodged by Shri Kamlesh Singh son of Shri Tribhuwan Singh resident of Village - Sarai Taluke Sahavpur, Dahiyavan, Bazar Soravan, Ganga Nagar, Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified copy of the first information report dated 23.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter namely Anjali Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was solemnized before two years. On 22.10.2023 the deceased was physically assutled and was murdered by the applicant and two others by strangulation. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant and his family members to get financial benefit. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his family members on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 23.10.2023 in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the informant and applicant, in which they unanimously stated that the deceased committed suicide herself. The photo/typed copy of the inquest report dated 23.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 24.10.2023 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors, and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. And no any injury was found on the body of the deceased. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 24.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about one day back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 24.10.2023 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner and tried to develop his prosecution story to fill the loopholes of the prosecution story to send the applicant behind the bar merely being the husband of the deceased. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 24.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the mother of the deceased was also recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 07.11.2023 in which she repeated the version of the informant in her own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant and his family members in said case crime. The photocopy of the statement of the mother of the deceased dated 07.11.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized according to the Hindu rituals. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and his family from the informant and his family as dowry prior to and after the marriage as alleged against the applicant and others. That initially the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased. That later on, the deceased wanted to live separately from the other family members of the applicant and after creating a regular nuisance in the family by the deceased therefore to avoid family disputes with the deceased, the applicant started to live separately with other family members but thereafter the demands of the deceased increase day by day. That after the separation from the brother & sister-in-law, the deceased was not happy and she started pressruzing the applicant for shifting to another district and finding a job at that place, for which the applicant was not ready. That due to the denial of leaving the village, the deceased was annoyed and stopped talking with the applicant and also did not properly take care of little son. That prior to that incident, the deceased several times locked herself in the room but always opened the door within a couple of hours. The applicant and other family members of the applicant were well aware of the short-tempered nature of the deceased thus the applicant was rest assured that the door would open soon. That due to her shot-tempered nature, committed suicide due to her own reasons but the informant has lodged the first information report against the applicant and others for his self-satisfaction. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and his family members after getting legal advice just for his satisfaction while he is well aware that his daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant is being the husband of the deceased falsely implicated in the said case crime by the informant along with his family while the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons. That the informant due to extraneous reasons named the brother & sister-in-law of the applicant in the case, and during the Investigation Office, they have been exonerated from all charges. That the investigating officer without proper investigation of the case crime submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others under bearing Charge Sheet on 17.11.2023 under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 17.11.2023 submitted in case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima facie offense is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid case. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in jail since 25.10.2023 without committing any crime. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is the father of the 10 months baby, who is presently residing with the deponent. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing Bail Application No. 3522 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow on insufficient grounds vide order dated 19.01.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 19.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 386 of 2023 under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of the case. |
I, Mohd. Naseem aged about 27 years son of Khaleel Ahamad resident of Mauli, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the cousin brother of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this . No any other bail application pending before this or rejected by this . That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against applicant and three family members of the applicant on 18.12.2013 on 09:15 hours by the mother of the deceased namely Shahnaz Bano, under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act on the basis of wrong facts, mentioning the incident took place on 18.12.2013. The photocopy of the first information report dated 18.12.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That the informant stated in the first information report, the marriage of daughter of informant namely Nashreen Bano was solemnized with applicant on 07.01.2013 in District – Pratapgarh and expend the money according her capacity. Just after marriage, the applicant and his family member was demanding dowry as one Motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- and when the demand of the applicant and his family members hav not fulfilled in result of that they brutally murdered his daughter. That the after the marriage the deceased came in house of the applicant and she was short tempered lady, just after few days of marriage the deceased requested to the applicant to leave his house with him and residing separately with deceased because the applicant has sole bread earner of the family and his income was not much as the deceased think. When they leave the family then the earning of the applicant is little bit better for the deceased. That the applicant always denied for leaving his house and family members because he was sole bread earner of the family and without him the family members of the applicant has been ruined but the deceased always quarreled with the applicant for leaving the family member of the applicant and wants to settle with the applicant another place. That the when the applicant not ready to leave his house and family member, the deceased became annoyed and starts quarreled with mother and sisters of the applicant, who is also named in first information report. The deceased having the relation with another person, the applicant always stopping her for such type activity but she was not stopping, even always chatting over her mobile phone. That when the deceased has not stopped therefore the applicant destroyed the mobile phone of the deceased, then in her safeguard and public defamation of applicant and his family members, the deceased always shouting and rumoring as the applicant and his family members were demanding the dowry from the deceased. That the deceased day by day became aggressive and on 17.12.2013 the deceased demanded the mobile phone of the applicant to make call but the applicant denied for same and after taken food, he was go to sleep. The deceased as she was short tempered lady, she committed suicide in her room. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 18.12.2013 before Panchat and all are opined as the deceased was died due to hanging but for proper investigation the post mortem is necessary. That the post mortem was done on body of the deceased on 18.12.2013 in District Hospital, Pratapgarh at 4.45 PM. The photocopy of the post mortem report dated 27.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer on 18.12.2013 wherein the informant repeated the version of her first information report in detail. The type copy of the statement of informant dated 18.12.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the applicant belongs to very poor family and running vegetable shop on footpath, by which he earns only for livelihood money but the informant alleged the applicant and his family demanded one Motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- same is unbelievable. That charge sheet filed by the investigation officer on 12.02.2014 against applicant including his mother under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act. That the applicant has been surrendered before the court 10.01.2014 and moved the bail application before the court concerned and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 12.12.2014. The copy of the order dated 12.12.2014 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 10.01.2014 and has no criminal history. That investigating officer has not found any evidence against the other accused on the basis of statements of the spot witnesses. That the applicant was running vegetable shop for the survival/livelihood of his family members but the deceased always pressurized him to bring her to another and the deceased was always quarreled for this issue with the applicant but the economic status of the applicant has not allowed bringing the deceased to another place. That on date of incident i.e. 17.12.2013, the deceased was start quarreling with applicant and demanding the mobile phone after dined for same she run away in room and locked from inside and committed suicide. That on basis of said issue the deceased committed suicide and nothing was done by the applicant as alleged by the informant and proved the concerned police. That the applicant has no issue with the deceased in his life except above mentioned but the informant has lodged first information report on the wrong facts. That there is no any evidence found by the investigating officer in regard of demand of the dowry. After suicide of the deceased the informant cooked this story overnight. That the applicant is innocent and due to take revenge with informant falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That there is no any evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime and the only evidence against the applicant in regard of alleged offence is only false story and baseless ground, which was by the informant and the police. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That a false story cooked up by the concerned police and informant as the applicant committing the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and false motive, for the money, has been fabricated by the concerned police. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Heera Lal aged about 53 years son of Shri Nankau resident of Village – Naya Ka Purwa hamlet of Janwamau, Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/pairokar of the applicant and doing parivi in aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the Jagdish/informant on 05.08.2017 against the accused applicant registered as Case Crime No. 92 of 2017 under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., 17, 18 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 relating to Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident which said to have been taken place on 22.07.2017 around 20:00 hours. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 05.08.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is in nutshell, on 22.07.2017 at 20:00 hours, the daughter of the informant namely Madhuri aged about 14 years went to backside of house for brought water from hand pump, at that time the applicant called her and taken away her on motorcycle. That after the said incident which was occurred on 22.07.2017 around 20.00 hours, the first information report has been lodged after 13 day delayed i.e. on 05.08.2017 about 16.45 hours, without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report. That the medical was conducted on 16.08.2017 at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh by the doctor, in which nothing has been found with regard to the rape. Here it is also relevant that there was no any external injuries found on the body of the victim and also in supplementary medical report “no spermatozoa seen in slide” and also radiological age of the victim was ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the medical report dated 16.08.2017 and supplementary medical report dated 21.08.2017 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the court concerned on 21.08.2017, in which the victim stated that when she was went for brought water at that time the applicant and one another Rahul, who is real brother of the applicant kidnapped her and she become unconscious, when she come in conscious, she was in Delhi. She was stayed with applicant about one week in Delhi but nothing has been done by the applicant i.e. the applicant not committed any offence in any manner with the victim. The photo/type copy of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of victim Madhuri is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim i.e. Madhuri is given under the threat of her family members as such same is not reliable and having no legal sanctity and liable to be rejected. That during the investigation, the investigating officer added the Sections 17, 18 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the applicant and brother of the applicant has also added in the first information report dated 05.08.2017. That the real fact of the incident is that the victim and applicant is fall in love and they always chatting over the mobile phone to each other, which is itself admitted by the informant of the case crime. That after knowing the fact with regard to relationship of the applicant and victim, the informant and his family members are tortured the victim. It is relevant to mention here that during the medical examination, the victim stated herself to doctor concerned as their family members tortures her, thus she leave her house with her own will with applicant. That the victim tried to convince to her family with regard to marry with applicant but the informant was not ready for their marry then the victim and applicant decided as they are major in age and therefore they will solemnize marriage with each other after standing their own feet in social. That thereafter they will leave their house on 22.07.2017 with their own will and residing in Delhi. It is also relevant to mention here that as the applicant and victim decide to marriage after some therefore they have not gone into physical relation. That the statement given by the victim before the court concerned under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is under influence of the informant as such same has no legal validity. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society and trying to establish his life but due to this false case, the future of the applicant has ruined. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is innocent and due to obtaining money for the state government and from the applicant for withdrawing the case, falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 19.08.2017 without committing any offense. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, Court No. 5, District – Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 30.08.2017. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 30.08.2017 passed by court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Chandrabhal aged about 58 years son of Sundar resident of Village – Parsehara, Police – Station - Ramkot, District – Sitapur, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 223 of 2014 under section 323, 366 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Mishrikh, District – Sitapur on 11.07.2014 at 12:30 hours against the applicant/accused. The first information report is lodged by father of the victim namely Shri Chaudhary Lal. The incident took place near about 4 months ago i.e. on 23.03.2014. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 11.07.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, on 23.03.2014 around 04.00 P.M., the complainant with his minor daughter namely Km. Nisha Devi and family members has gone to participate in Holi Mela at Mishrikh, Sitapur where the son-in-law of the complainant i.e. the applicant met with them and bring the victim, in Mela and both has not returned till. After his best effort they have un-traceable and hence the First Information Report has been lodged against the applicant/accused. That the victim is not minor girl, her birth date is 14.07.1991 as per her high school mark sheet, in which the victim participated in year 2007 and passed out. According to her birth date her age is 23 years on date of incident. The victim is passed is graduate and completed his gradation in year 2012. The photocopy of the high school mark sheet is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the victim was come back itself on 23.08.2014 and the complainant was produced her before concerned police. That the investigation officer recorded the statement of the victim on 23.08.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C., in which the victim stated that she was met with applicant in Mela and go with him to meet her sister with free will, there was no any undue influence. The victim went Haridwar with applicant via public transport i.e. train and live as husband and wife but she was never raised alarm at any stage because of the victim is considering party and enjoy her life with applicant in Haridwar. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 23.08.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the victim clearly stated in her statement the applicant was come into the Mela to meet with her and also accepted that she was regularly meet with the applicant from since long back. That the victim further stated in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant called his parent and they have come and bring to her their home at Village – Parsehara, Police – Station, District – Sitapur and thereafter victim come her home with her parent. That the statement under 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim was recorded on 27.08.2014 by the competent authority, therein she change her statement and stated, when she was in Haridwar she was rapped by the applicant and father of the applicant and Guddu bring her to Village – Khatakri and after 2-3 days the victim bring her to Delhi and take back returned to Mishrikh crossing and leave alone, and then she was returned to her home. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 27.08.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the investigating officer prepared the recovery memo on 23.08.2014 after producing the victim by her parent. The victim come the police station with her parent and her father was bring the victim before concerned police for informing in this regard. The photocopy/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 23.08.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the mother of the victim, namely Kanya Devi, moved the application for taking custody of the victim being her mother. The A.C.J.M., Court No. 2, Sitapur and same has ordered to release the victim on his will on 27.08.2014. That on 16.06.2014 the victim moved a complaint before A.C.J.M., II, Sitapur against her father/ complainant, mother and sister as they have fixed her marriage without her consent and when she protest, all have beaten on 15.04.2014 and prayed that take action against all of them. That on 26.06.2014 the statement of the victim was recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. by the concerned magistrate, wherein she stated that she loved with applicant and want to marry with accused but the family members want to solemnize her marriage with anyone other. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under section 200 Cr.P.C. dated 26.06.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That medical of the victim was done at , Sitapur on 23.08.2014. According to medical report the “no definite opinion regarding sexual assault can be given. The photocopy of the medical report of victim dated 23.08.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the X-ray report was submitted by the concerned medical officer on 25.08.2014 by which the radiological age of the victim declared 18 years old. The photocopy of the X-ray report dated 25.08.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That the investing officer submitted the charge sheet before the court concerned on 03.12.2014 without considering the fact and reality of the case. That the real story of the case is that the victim has physical relationship with the applicant with her consent since long time and victim come with applicant with her own will. That the complainant lodged wrong First Information Report against the applicant, his daughter was passed her graduation in year 2012 and was know that the age of his daughter is 23 years but he stated in tahrir the girl is minor. That the victim is major in age and has her free will/consent to live with applicant therefore she was travel with applicant to several places without any issue. That the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim dated 24.08.2014 recorded under pressure of the concerned police and her parents to falsely imprecate the applicant in said crime case. That a false story cooked up by the concerned police and parent of the victim for obtaining the money form the state government, which is given to the rapped victim. That the victim never raises any alarm and never told to anyone in regard of act of the applicant as she alleged in his statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is innocent and due to obtaining money for the state government and from the applicant for withdrawing the case, falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 01.10.2014. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Sitapur but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.01.2015. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.01.2015 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Ajamat Ali aged about 62 years son of Shri Makabool, resident of Village – Asarahi Saraiya, Police Station - Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Muslim, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the pairokar of the aforesaid case and he is nephew of the applicant and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the Hansraj Kori/informant on the 06.06.2016 against the accused Nikku son of Munshiraza resident of Village – Asarahi Saraiya, Police Station - Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, registered as Case Crime No. 330 of 2016 under Sections 376, 323, 308, 506 I.P.C., 3/4 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and 3(2)(5) S.C. & S. T. Act relating to Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident which said to have been taken place on 05.06.2016 around 20:00 hours. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 06.06.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is in nutshell, on 05.06.2016 at 20:00 hours, the daughter of the informant namely Shalu aged about 13 years gone to the field for nature call, at that time the accused Nikku forcefully rapped with her along with applicant and one another accused namely Baiku alias Kismat and they also given threaten for life. After searching the victim was found unconscious and thereafter she told everything to her mother, when she come to incident place. That it would be relevant to point out here, in the first information report the informant himself says as the first information report was lodged after asking everything from the victim Shalu but the name of the applicant is not named in the first information report. That after the said incident which was occurred on 05.06.2016 around 20.00 hours, the first information report has been lodged after one day delayed i.e. on 06.06.2016 about 21.10 hours, without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report. That the after five days of the said alleged incident i.e. on 10.06.2016 the statement of the victim was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she stated that when she was gone for nature call at that time the Nikku rapped her and she was become unconscious thereafter the Nikku called to applicant and another accused. That the medical was conducted on 07.06.2016 at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh by the doctor, in which nothing has been found with regard to the rape as alleged by the victim. Here it is also relevant that there was no any external injuries found on the body of the victim and also in supplementary medical report “no spermatozoa seen in slide” and also radiological age of the victim was ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the medical report dated 07.06.2016 and supplementary medical report dated 13.06.2016 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That after the said alleged incident, the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the court concerned on 14.06.2016, in which the victim changed her story as she was went for nature call on 06.06.2016 around 8.15PM then the accused Nikku caught her brought to brick field and call to Bhola i.e. the applicant and another person accused, thereafter all were rapped with her. She also stated in her statement, her father lodged the first information report in morning while the first information was lodged at 21.10 hours of 06.06.2016. The photo/type copy of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of victim Shalu is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That in statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., she stated that the incident was taken on 06.06.2016 around 20.15 hours and her father lodged the impugned first information report in early morning whereas the first information report was lodged on 06.06.2016 about 21.10 hours. That the victim herself created doubt on the alleged offense as same was taken place or not. It is also relevant to mention here that as per victim she was rapped at brick field but she was recovered backside of her house. That the real fact of the incident is that the father of the victim i.e. informant has enmity with the applicant with regard to election of Gram Pradhan as the applicant was not supported his candidate, even he was opposed him. During election period several time the informant along with Gram Pradhan candidate Saleem Kureshi, who has win the election, threaten the applicant as you may face consequence of this oppose. That the Gram Pradhan Saleem Kureshi and the informant are good friends and in meantime the daughter of the informant became rape victim and the first information report has been lodged against the Nikku on 05.06.2016. That thereafter the informant and the Gram Pradhan Saleem Kureshi to take revenge from the applicant make plan to falsely implicate the applicant in criminal case, which is lodged by the informant against the Nakku. That in result of the conspiracy between the informant and the Gram Pradhan Saleem Kureshi, the applicant has been falsely implicate in said case crime, when the victim tell his name in statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. after 8 days of said alleged incident. That the statement given by the victim before the court concerned under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is under influence of the informant and the Gram Pradhan Saleem Kureshi as such same has no legal validity. That the trial of the case crime has been started bearing Session Trail No. 90 of 2016 and the victim has been examined on 14.12.2016 as PW-3 in said trail. That one day the all accused of the case crime forcefully fed a medicine/tablet and brings anywhere and made abortion and throw out from his house. That the informant was come back itself her father’s home and try to lodge the first information report but same has not been lodged even an compromise has been done for arranging the marriage, but thereafter the applicant and his family members are abusing and threatened for her life. That medical of the victim was done at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh on 31.07.2017 at 02:00 P.M. and Supplementary Medical Report was prepared on 06.08.2017. According to supplementary medical report the “Radiological age is above 18 years and also no spermatozoa seen.” The photo/type copy of the medical report dated 31.07.2017 and supplementary medical report dated 06.08.2017 is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the informant/victim recorded on 10.08.2017 under section 164 Cr.P.C., in which the victim stated as per her first information report till live in applicant’s house and thereafter she change her statement and stated the his son Praveen give a medicine to her and furnished her abortion and sent her to his parent’s home. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 10.08.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the victim clearly stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the applicant was not involve in the said case crime. The applicant is father of the Praveen due to this his name has been impleaded in the said case crime. That it is also clear in said statement, the applicant has not given any medicine to the informant and also not involved in furnishing the abortion of her. That in first information report, the informant stated she was brought anywhere for furnishing the abortion but in statement under 164 Cr.P.C. the abortion furnished at applicant’s house. That the real story of the case is that due to familiar reason as the father of the informant/victim was died in earlier age, her three sister are married and her brother solemnized his marriage and the informant avoided by her family, as such she is immoral lady and having physical relationship with unknown persons. That the informant pregnant during her enjoyment and for escaping herself from the defamation in social or village, she came to house of the applicant and falsely alleged against his son and threaten by her to applicant and his family for solemnize the marriage with son of the applicant, when offer of the informant rejected by the applicant. That after rejection of the proposal of the informant, she become annoyed and lodged First Information Report against the applicant and his family members on the wrong and incurred facts. That the victim as herself stated in her first information report dated 29.07.2017, she is major in age and has sound mind therefore she is not influence by anyone in regard to make physical relation but as she is not decent lady, she implicate the applicant and his family members. That the first information report lodged by the informant is too much delayed more than six months and during this period she never approached to any authority concerned to take appropriate action against the accused. That a false story cooked up by the informant and parent of the victim for obtaining the money form the state government, which is given to the rapped victim. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is innocent and due to obtaining money for the state government and from the applicant for withdrawing the case, falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 11.08.2016. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.03.2017. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.03.2017 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Ram Naresh aged about 43 years son of Shri Raja Ram resident of Village – Nahar Par Hinahuh, Police Station - Nawabganj, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Labour, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.08.2022 at 20.20 hours against the applicant and another which has been registered as Case Crime No. 135 of 2022 under Sections 376, 354-C, 506, 120-B of I.P.C., 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 and 3(2)V, 3(2)Va of S.C. & S.T. Act. related to the Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh. The certified/type copy of the first information report dated 02.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the prosecution story, in a nutshell, is that, on 20.07.2022 at about 12.00 A.M., when the daughter of the opposite party No. (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) was sleeping on the roof, the applicant raped her and clicked some objectionable photographs and gave a life threat. It has been further alleged that some objectionable photographs were clicked on the mobile phone of the uncle of the victim. That according to the first information report lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.08.2022, the incident took place on 20.07.2022 but the first information report has been lodged after 13 days without giving any explanation, which clearly shows that the first information report was lodged on the basis of the ill legal advice for extraneous reasons. That the applicant submits before this Hon’ble Court that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in her first information report dated 02.08.2022. The first information report is highly doubtful and there is no satisfactory explanation for the said reason. That the statement of the opposite party No. 2 was recorded on 03.08.2022 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which she almost repeated her first information report in another manner. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 dated 03.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That on 05.08.2022 the statement of the victim has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which she also repeated the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the victim dated 05.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the victim was medically examined on 04.08.2022 at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh and her medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story and nothing has been found regarding the commission of rape with her. The photo/ typed copy of the medical report dated 04.08.2022, radiology report dated 06.08.2022 and supplementary medical report dated 06.09.2022 of the victim are being annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court, in which she stated that on 20.07.2022 the applicant committed rape with her and also took some objectionable photographs and said that if she informed someone about said incident then the applicant will murdered her father. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as endorsed in CD No. 10 dated 29.08.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the concerned police have asked for the date of birth of the victim from the Principal of the victim’s school, which has been given and stating therein that as per school records the date of birth of the victim is 14.07.2005. The photo/typed copy of the reply given to the concerned police by the Principal dated 05.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer submitted charge sheet No. 121 of 2022 on 09.09.2022 against the applicant under Section 376, 354-C, 506 of I.P.C., 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 and 3(2)V, 3(2)Va of S.C. & S.T. Act. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has not been concerned with the alleged incident in any manner, and the applicant has been falsely implicated by the opposite party No. 2 due to extraneous reasons. That the applicant provided the shuttering services and he also gave his services to the uncle of the victim i.e. another named accused of the case crime. That later on, the opposite party No. 2 requested to provide the shuttering and after calculation when the applicant gave an estimate of expenses then the opposite party No. 2 expresses her inability to pay said amount. That the opposite party No. 2 offered a very low amount for providing shuttering service hence the applicant denied for same therefore the opposite party No. 2 given the threat to face consequences of the same. That the opposite party No. 2 has bad relations with another accused namely Babloo, who is her brother-in-law (Devar) and she tried to falsely implicate him. That another accused, had taken some objectionable photographs of the victim and due to enmity with the opposite party No. 2, he was showing the said photographs to others, when the same fact came to know the opposite party No. 2 then she found the golden chance to falsely implicate the applicant and she lodged the first information report on the basis of the false and concocted story. That on 10.08.2022, when the applicant was arrested with another accused, the objectionable photographs of the victim were found in his mobile phone. The typed copy of the arresting-cum-recovery memo dated 10.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the statement of another accused has been recorded by the concerned police in which he stated that for taking revenge on the opposite party No. 2 he has shown the photos of the victim to others. The typed copy of the statement of another accused is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant but for extraneous reasons, the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That according to the prosecution story, it is clearly revealed that the story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from the present case crime, in which the first bail application is being moved by the applicant, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That the co-accused of the case crime namely Babalo filed bail before the court below and he has been granted bail by the Additional District Judge/ Special Judge, (POCSO), Pratapgarh vide its order dated 13.01.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 13.01.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant had filed an application for bail before the Additional District Judge/ Special Judge, (POCSO), Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 855 of 2023 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 25.05.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 07.06.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members in malafide intention. That the opposite party No. 2 is the mother of 9 daughters, in which the victim is her 4th daughter and she is financially too weak. She is also unable to solemnize the marriage of her daughters therefore her three daughters solemnized their marriages herself. That the opposite party No. 2 on ill advice, lodged the first information report against the applicant and another for getting the money from the state government, which has been given to the rape victims, on the basis of a false and concocted story. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.02.2022 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 135 of 2022 under Sections 376, 354-C, 506 of I.P.C., 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 and 3(2)V, 3(2)Va of S.C. & S.T. Act related to the Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice. |
I, Basante aged about 43 years son of Shri Munni Lal resident of Village – Survara, Police Station – Inayatnagar, District – Ayodhya, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/pairokar of the applicant and doing parivi in aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the affidavit/photo slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by Shri Santlal resident of Village – Jamua, Police Station – Inayatnagar, District – Ayodhya (hereinafter referred to as informant) on 10.06.2018 against the applicant registered as Case Crime No. 214 of 2019 under Sections 363 of I.P.C. and 17, 18 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station – Inayatnagar, District – Faizabad regarding the incident which said to have been taken place on 08.06.2018 around 10:00 hours. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 10.06.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report dated 10.06.2018, the prosecution story is in nutshell, the applicant on 08.06.2018 around 10.00 hours abducted the daughter and niece namely Km. Jyoti & Km. Shivani respectively, who were minors. That after the said incident which was occurred on 08.06.2018 around 10.00 hours, the first information report has been lodged after 2 day delayed i.e. on 10.06.2018 about 18.31 hours, without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report. That Km. Shivani was recovered by the concerned police on 10.09.2018 and handed over her family members after recording the statements of the under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C.. That the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. recorded by the concerned police of the Kr. Shivani on 10.09.2018, in which stated that she went with the applicant along with sister and lived in Delhi and when her mother was expired then she returned back and recovered by the concerned police. The typed copy of the statement of the Km. Shivani dated 10.09.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the medical was conducted on 16.08.2019 at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh by the doctor, in which nothing has been found with regard to the rape. Here it is also relevant that there was no any external injuries found on the body of the victim and also in supplementary medical report “no spermatozoa seen in slide” and also radiological age of the victim was ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the medical report dated 16.08.2019 and supplementary medical report dated 21.08.2019 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the court concerned on 21.08.2019, in which the victim stated that when she was went for brought water at that time the applicant and one another Rahul, who is real brother of the applicant kidnapped her and she become unconscious, when she come in conscious, she was in Delhi. She was stayed with applicant about one week in Delhi but nothing has been done by the applicant i.e. the applicant not committed any offence in any manner with the victim. The photo/type copy of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of victim Madhuri is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim i.e. Madhuri is given under the threat of her family members as such same is not reliable and having no legal sanctity and liable to be rejected. That during the investigation, the investigating officer added the Sections 17, 18 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the applicant and brother of the applicant has also added in the first information report dated 10.06.2018. That the real fact of the incident is that the victim and applicant is fall in love and they always chatting over the mobile phone to each other, which is itself admitted by the informant of the case crime. That after knowing the fact with regard to relationship of the applicant and victim, the informant and his family members are tortured the victim. It is relevant to mention here that during the medical examination, the victim stated herself to doctor concerned as their family members tortures her, thus she leave her house with her own will with applicant. That the victim tried to convince to her family with regard to marry with applicant but the informant was not ready for their marry then the victim and applicant decided as they are major in age and therefore they will solemnize marriage with each other after standing their own feet in social. That thereafter they will leave their house on 22.07.2019 with their own will and residing in Delhi. It is also relevant to mention here that as the applicant and victim decide to marriage after some therefore they have not gone into physical relation. That the statement given by the victim before the court concerned under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is under influence of the informant as such same has no legal validity. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society and trying to establish his life but due to this false case, the future of the applicant has ruined. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is innocent and due to obtaining money for the state government and from the applicant for withdrawing the case, falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 01.11.2018 without committing any offense. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, Court No. 5, District – Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 28.02.2019. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 28.02.2019 passed by court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Priyam Srivastava aged about 24 years son of Shri Dilip Srivastava resident of Village – Dharmganj Godairee, Police Station – Haidarganj, District - Ayodhya, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Private Job, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the Ram Milan/informant on the 19.02.2019 at 22.23 hours against the applicant and two other persons, registered as Case Crime No. 98 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C., 16, 17 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 relating to Police Station – Bikapur, District – Faizabad regarding the incident which said to have been taken place on 18.02.2019 around 08:00 hours. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 19.02.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is in nutshell, on 18.02.2019 at 08:00 hours, the daughter of the informant namely Anshu Kumari (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) aged about 16 years went to school and when she not returned home by evening then he searched his best and came to know that the applicant eloped the victim. That after the said incident which was occurred on 18.02.2019 around 08.00 hours, the first information report has been lodged after one day delayed i.e. on 19.02.2019 about 22.23 hours, without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report. That on 01.03.2019, the victim was recovered by concerned police and her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. recorded by the concerned police, in which she stated that she has fallen love with the applicant and having love relation and she herself gone with the applicant and solemnized marriage with him with her own free WILL. The photocopy of the case diary No. CD-3 of the case crime mentioning the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That on 02.03.2019, the victim was brought to hospital by the concerned police for the medical but she denied for same and same has been duly confirmed and verified by her mother. The photocopy of the case diary No. CD-4 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the concerned court on 08.03.2019, in which she almost repeated her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and stated that she was not abducted by the applicant, even she herself went with her and solemnized marriage with her own free WILL. The photocopy of the case diary No. CD-6 of case crime which contents the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of victim is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That later on the medical of the victim was conducted by the doctor, in which her radiological age has been ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the case diary No. CD-5 of case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That in statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., she stated that she loved to the applicant and she went with him and solemnized marriage with the applicant. That the real fact of the incident is that the applicant and victim have fallen in love and decided to live with each other but the decision of the applicant and victim was not welcomed by the family members of the victim. That thereafter the family members of the victim started searching bridegroom for victim thereafter the applicant and victim decided to leave their house and solemnized marriage. That the applicant and victim has no other way except to leave their house and finally they leave their house on 18.02.2019 and solemnized their marriage in presence of their well-wishers. The photographs of the marriage of the applicant and victim along high school certificate of the victim are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the whole story cooked by the informant and their family members against the applicant and explained by the concerned police. That during the investigation the Section 376 of IPC and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has been added and 17, 18 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 withdrawn. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever and has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant is in Jail since 08.03.2019 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Special Judge POCSO Act/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Faizabad but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 10.07.2019. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 10.07.2019 passed by the learned court is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Vinod Singh aged about 49 years son of Shri Mritunjay Pratap Singh resident of Amaon, Police Station – Mungra, Badshahpur, District - Jaunpur, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Former, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant on new grounds before this Hon'ble High Court. Earlier the first bail application filed by the applicant bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 12030 (B) of 2021 (Shubham Singh Vs State of U.P.) has been rejected on 13.04.2022 by Hon’ble Justice Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh ‘J’. This is the second bail application of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. The photocopy of the order dated 13.04.2022 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the Smt. Archna Singh wife of Late Sudhir Singh resident of Village – Jogapur Narshingh Bhan Ka Purwa, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) on the 25.02.2021 at 01:38 hours against the applicant registered as Case Crime No. 171 of 2021 under Sections 376, 506 of IPC and 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 relating to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident which said to have been taken place on 20.03.2020. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 25.02.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant, the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant has lodged Case Crime No. 07 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201, 34, 506 IPC at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is also accused for murder of informant’s husband. After murder of husband of the informant the applicant used to harass the informant and threatening her. On 20.03.2020 under the life threat informant’s minor son, the applicant raped her and also recorded the incident. That after the said incident which was occurred on 20.03.2020 around 11.00 hours and the first information report has been lodged after more than 11 months delayed i.e. on 25.02.2021 about 01.38 hours, without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report. That on very same i.e. on 25.02.2021, the statement of the informant has been recorded by concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she almost repeated her first information report and also tried to falsely implicate in alleged case crime by stating that the applicant raped her from 17.03.2020 to 20.03.2020. The typed copy of the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this application. That the informant refused to get examined medically after she was produced at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh on 26.02.2021 before medical officer of the concerned hospital without any reason, which was duly signed by the son of the informant. The denial from the medical by the informant herself which itself creates doubt upon the prosecution story. The photo/typed copy of the denial of the medical of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the statement of informant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the concerned court on 01.03.2021, she changed her statement and stated that after murder of husband of the informant, the applicant after releasing on bail in June, 2019, started molestation with the informant and due to fear of the applicant, she leaved the District – Pratapgarh and moved to her parental house i.e. District – Varanasi and resided there. The informant further alleged that incident took place on 20.03.2020 around 11.00 hours and said the applicant has raped her from 17.03.2020 to 20.03.2021 i.e. three days. The typed copy of the statement of informant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is being annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the statement of the informant given under Sections 161 & 164 is not trustworthy as it is not possible that the informant was abducted by the applicant on 17.03.2020 till 20.03.2020 but no any family members of the informant searching her or not approached the concerned police regarding her missing. That the further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police on 05.04.2021, in which she stated that she had provided the Whatsapp chat of the applicant and informant from 12.03.2020 to 17.03.2020 earlier and further stated that rest chats are not available due to damage of her mobile phone. The typed copy of the further statement dated 05.04.2021 of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant was residing at the house of the informant as tenant. That the husband of the informant was doing business of real estate and the applicant was also associated with her husband. That on 01.01.2019 the husband of the informant was murdered by his business revival and thereafter a first information report dated 03.01.2019 bearing Case Crime No. 07 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201, 34, 506 IPC at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh 5 named and one unknown person by the informant. The applicant was not named in the first information report dated 03.01.2019. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 03.01.2019 lodged by the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That thereafter name of the applicant came in light in Case Crime 07 of 2019 by the statement of the sister of the deceased husband of the informant recorded by the concerned police on 12.01.2019 as eyewitness, in which she stated that on 01.01.2019 around 23.00 hours, she saw that her brother was with the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the sister of the deceased husband of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That later on the business revival of the deceased husband of the informant, who have money and muscular power, their names were dropped during investigation and the charge sheet has been filed only against the applicant by the concerned police. That the applicant was sent to jail in connection of the Case Crime No. 07 of 2019 and released on from in June, 2019 after getting bail granted by this Hon'ble High Court on 29.05.2019. That after coming back to home, the informant met with the accused and stated that some dispute arisen with her father-in-law and mother-in-law and they have forcefully brought her son with them and the informant wants the help of the applicant in filing the case before Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh for taking custody of her son from her father-in-law and mother-in-law. That the applicant bonafidly was helping the informant for filing the case for taking custody of her son from her father-in-law and mother-in-law as he was also help after murder of her husband in lodging of the first information repot on 03.01.2019. That the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the informant submitted their reply/objection before the Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh and later on the case of custody of the informant’s son has been given to her father-in-law and mother-in-law vide order dated 09.07.2019 passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh. The photocopy of the order passed by the 09.07.2019 passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the informant given wrong and false statement before the trial court which is going on in relation to the Case Crime No. 7 of 2019. The informant is prosecution witness in said trial and stated that the custody of the informant’s son neither given to her mother-in-law and father-in-law nor order passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh in their favour. The photo/typed copy of the statement given by the informant before trial court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That after defeating the case of custody of her son, the informant become annoyed with the applicant and threatened that as the applicant has not helped her and he will face the consequences of the same. That later on the informant in love and affection of her son, met with her father-in-law and mother-in-law and conspire against the applicant to build/ create new grounds for conviction of the applicant in trail, which is going on in relation to the Case Crime No. 07 of 2019. That later on after well planning the informant with the help of her father-in-law and mother-in-law lodged the instant first information report against the applicant on 25.02.2021 showing the incident dated 20.03.2020 after more than 11 months on false and concocted grounds. That here it is relevant to mention that the father-in-law moved an complaint which was duly forwarded by the then Cabinet Minister of the Government of U.P. to handover the investigation of the Case Crime No. 7 of 2019 to the C.B.C.I.D. as he has doubt upon the informant that she was involved in the murder of her husband. The photocopy of the complaint moved by the father-in-law of the informant against her is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That the trial has been initiated in the case crime and the informant has called by the trial court several time for recording her statement but for harassing the applicant not appearing before the trial court due to which the trial of the applicant is lingering on and he is languishing in jail. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from above mentioned, in which the second bail application is being moving by the applicant, two other false and wrong cases have been lodged against the applicant, which are as under: The photocopy of the order dated 29.05.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 23.09.2021. The photo copy of bail rejection order dated 23.09.2021 passed by the learned court is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant and their family members in malafide intention. That the fact that the informant had refused her medical examination after leveling very serious allegations of rape against the applicant and not giving any explanation for the same, indicates the possibility of false implication of the accused. No justification or logical reason is coming forth from the informant regarding the refusal of the informant for her medical examination. The refusal of the informant to get her medical examination conducted and give samples indicates the possibility of false prosecution of the applicant and throws a doubt on the veracity of her allegations against the applicant. That where the evidence of the informant is found suffering from serious infirmities and inconsistencies with other material and there being refusal by the informant to undergo medical examination, then no reliance can be placed upon her evidence. Onus is always on the informant to prove and informant is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt. That the case of the informant is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from weakness of case of defence. In case the evidence is read in totality and story projected by the informant is found to be improbable, prosecution case becomes liable to be rejected. The informant knew the accused prior to the incident. If evidence of informant is read and considered in totality of circumstances along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have been committed, her deposition does not inspire confidence. That the informant denied to have examined medically without reason, which creates doubt the prosecution story thus the absence of any medical report/examination of the informant would go in favour of the applicant and he is entitled to get benefit of doubt. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 09.09.2021 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 171 of 2021 under Sections 376, 506 of IPC and 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 related to the Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case. |
I, Maniram Mishra aged about 60 years son of Shri Anurudh Prasad Mishra resident of Peeg, Peeng, Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Former, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father/pariokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 10.09.2022 at 17.35 hours against the applicant which has been registered as Case Crime No. 252 of 2022 under Sections 354-D, 504, 506 of IPC and 7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 at Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh with regard to incident dated 23.01.2022. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 10.09.2022 lodged by the opposite party No. 2 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the prosecution story in a nutshell is that; the opposite party No. 2 is the owner of a shop and rarely his daughter visited the shop. The applicant is working in a medical shop which is in front of the shop of the opposite party No. 2. On 23.01.2022, the applicant molest his daughter but no report was lodged against him due to which again on 07.09.2022, the applicant molest his daughter. That the opposite party No. 2 lodged the first information report after more than eight months after the incident without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report after well thought on the basis legal advice. Here it is relevant to mention that the first information report has been written by an advocate, which is clear after reading the first information report. That the applicant submits before this Hon’ble Court that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in his first information report dated 10.09.2022. The first information report is highly delayed and there is no satisfactory explanation for the said reason. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 against the applicant on the wrong, false story and for the purpose of taking revenge on the applicant and his family members due to caste politics. That on 10.09.2022, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 has been recorded by concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he almost repeated his version of the first information report and also tried to improve her story to falsely implicate the applicant and others in the alleged case crime. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this application. That on 11.09.2022, the statement of the victim has been recorded by the concerned police, in which changed the prosecution story and stated that the applicant molest her on 23.01.2022 and again on 07.09.2022, when she was returning home from her school then she fell from her bicycle. The victim added additional supported facts to improve her story to falsely implicating the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. dated 11.09.2022 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That later on the medical of the victim was conducted by the doctor on 11.09.2022 in District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh, in which her radiological age has been ascertained as 14 to 15 years and there were no any injuries found. The photo/typed copy of the medical rape of the victim of the case crime dated 11.09.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court on 13.09.2022, in which she changed her statement of 161 of Cr.P.C. and again tried her best to improve the prosecution story with additional facts. The victim stated that she was chatting with the applicant for the last 8-9 months and the applicant committed rape with her on 23.01.2022 when her father was not at his shop. The applicant was caught by some persons and beaten by them. The victim further stated that on 07.08.2022, the applicant molest and abused her when she was returning home from school. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 13.09.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the statement of the victim given under Sections 161 & 164 is not trustworthy as both statements have several contradictions, which have been clearly shown the same. That prior to recording of the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the victim, there was the no allegation made with regard to the rape of the victim but suddenly on 13.09.2022 the victim stated in her statement under 164 of Cr.P.C. that the applicant committed rape with her on 23.01.2022 and on 07.08.2022 molest & abused her. That during the investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer recorded the statements of the 8 eyewitnesses, who have almost given similar statements against the applicant. On bare perusal of the statements of the eyewitnesses, it has been clear that they have said that they have heard that the applicant committed offense with the victim, which clearly shows that they are not eyewitnesses of the case crime as mentioned by the investigating officer. That thereafter on 25.09.2022 charge sheet No. 247 of 2022 has been filed against the applicant by the investigating officer under Sections 354-D, 504, 506, 376 of IPC and 7/8, 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant is falsely implicated in the case crime by the opposite party No. 2 due to local caste politics. That the applicant belongs to the Brahman caste and the opposite party No. 2 is belongs to Ahir (Yadav) caste. That the applicant is working in a medical shop, which was situated in front of the shop of opposite party No. 2. The opposite party No. 2 has enmity with the applicant and other upper castes due to his own reasons. That the opposite party No. 2 on several occasions humiliated the applicant without any reasons and threatened to send him in jail. That thereafter the opposite party No. 2 with the help of members of his caste, who also having enmity with the applicant merely for being Brahman, lodged the first information report on 10.09.2022 with the help of an Advocate namely Vineet Kumar Yadav. That after lodging the said first information report, for putting gravity to his case, under the pressure of the opposite party No. 2, the victim changed her statement and stated that the applicant has committed rape with her on 23.01.2022. That the opposite party No. 2 produced the 8 eyewitnesses in support of his prosecution story, who all are his well-wishers and all belong to his caste. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That except the present case, the applicant has no criminal history. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO), Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 492 of 2023 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 25.05.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 25.05.2023 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the case of the opposite party No. 2 is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from the weakness of the case of defence. In case the evidence is read in totality and the story projected by the opposite party No. 2 is found to be improbable, the prosecution case becomes liable to be rejected. If evidence of opposite party No. 2 is read and considered in the totality of circumstances along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have been committed, his deposition does not inspire confidence. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in jail since 11.09.2022 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 252 of 2022 under Sections 354-D, 504, 506, 376 of IPC and 7/8, 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 related to the Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case. |
I, Shivani Maurya aged about 24 years wife of Shri Vishaal resident of Rahi, Police Station – Mill Area, District - Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.12.2022 at 14.36 hours against the brother of the applicant namely Vishal Maurya which has been registered as Case Crime No. 503 of 2022 under Sections 376, 506 of IPC and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli with regard to incident dated 17.10.2022. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 02.12.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the prosecution story in nutshell is that; the applicant is the son-in-law of the opposite party No. 2 and as per allegations the brother of the applicant has bad eye on the property of the opposite party No. 2 and her another daughter also. On 17.10.2022, the brother of the applicant went to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and requested to stay there for resolving the issues, which were between them. When the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 raised alarm then she went to the room of her daughter where she found that the brother of the applicant was in the objectionable stage then her daughter informed that he raped her twice thereafter he threatened for life and for viral the video recorded by the brother of the applicant. That the opposite party No. 2 lodged the first information report around 45 days after the incident without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report. Here it is relevant to mention that the opposite party No. 2 herself moved application before the State Women Commission instead of moving application before the concerned Police Station or other higher authority of the police. That the applicant submits before this Hon’ble Court that the applicant was not named in the first information report and not committed any offence as alleged by the opposite party No. 2. The first information report is highly delayed and there is no satisfactory explanation for the said reason. That the applicant has been named in the case crime on the wrong and incorrect facts in counterblast to save herself in retaliation of the first information report lodged against her by the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant on 16.04.2022 bearing Case Crime No. 174 of 2022 under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli. The photocopy of the first information report dated 16.04.2022 lodged by the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) against the opposite party No. 2 and another is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in her first information report dated 02.12.2022. That on 04.12.2022, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 has been recorded by concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she changed the version her first information report and introduced the two new accused, who are friends of the applicant including the applicant and also tried to improve her story to falsely implicate the applicant and others in alleged case crime. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this application. That on very same day i.e. 04.12.2022, the statement of the victim has been recorded by the concerned police, who also repeated the statement of under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of her mother alongwith additional improved facts to falsely implicate the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. dated 04.12.2022 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That later on the medical of the victim was conducted by the doctor on 08.12.2022 in District Women Hospital, Raebareli, in which her radiological age has been ascertained as 17 years and there were no any injuries found. The photo/typed copy of the medical rape of the victim of the case crime dated 08.12.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the concerned court on 12.12.2022, in which she changed her statement of 161 of Cr.P.C. and again tried her best to improve the prosecution story with additional facts. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 12.12.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the statement of the opposite party No. 2 and victim given under Sections 161 & 164 is not trustworthy as both statements have several contradictions, which have been clearly showing the same. That the opposite party No. 2 and victim stated their statement under Section 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. that the applicant was recording the video of the alleged incident. That the investigating officer submitted another charge sheet No. 38A of 2023 on 01.04.2023 in which the name of the wife and two friends of the applicant dropped and the applicant has been charge sheeted. The photocopy of the charge sheet No. 38A of 2023 dated 01.04.2023 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the brother of the applicant and daughter of the opposite party No. 2 namely Shivani were in love and solemnized their marriage with the consent of the opposite party No. 2. That the mother of the applicant’s wife i.e. opposite party No. 2 wants to involve her daughter in flesh trading for she was not ready hence she annoyed with her daughter and brother of the applicant also. Meanwhile, his brother was sent to jail in connection with a forged and fabricated case, then the opposite party No. 2 called her daughter at home and thereafter her lover namely Ravi Shankar raped the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant, in which the opposite party No. 2 helped him. That here it is relevant to mention that the opposite party No. 2 have only two daughters and elder is the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant. That the opposite party No. 2 is also annoyed with the brother of the applicant and his wife as the concerned police have filed the charge sheet against her and another in connection with Case Crime No. 174 of 2022 on 26.07.2022. That the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 has also filed several civil cases before the competent court of law against her mother i.e. opposite party No. 2 to restrain her as she was selling and gifting the ancestral property of her father to her lover or others. The details of the suit filed by between the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant and the opposite party No. 2 are as under: Case No. 2476 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Rekha) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2834 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sangeeta Devi and another) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2387 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Rekha Devi and others) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2124 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sheela and others) which is pending before competent court which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2476 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sangeeta Devi), which is pending before competent court. Original Suit No. 959 of 2022 (Sangeeta Vs Shivani Maurya), which is dismissed on 02.11.2022. That the opposite party No. 2 and her lover tried their best to convince the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant for withdrawing the civil and criminal cases, lodged by her but she is not ready for the same and when the opposite party No. 2 failed in their aim then she lodged the named the applicant on false and incorrect facts. That the opposite party No. 2 and her lover are habitual offender and almost similar case has been lodged against them alongwith other accused bearing Case Crime No. 402 of 2022 under Sections 376, 328, 506, 120-B of I.P.C. at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli on 18.09.2022. That after lodging the said first information report, in retaliation as a counterblast to the first information report dated 16.04.2022 lodged by the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant, a first information report lodged by the opposite party No. 2 against the brother of the applicant. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from above mentioned, in which the first bail application is being moving by the applicant, there is no other criminal case lodged against him i.e. the applicant has no criminal history. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge POCSO (Exclusive), First, Raebareli bearing Bail Application No. 1125 of 2023 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 24.04.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 24.04.2023 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members in malafide intention. That the role of the applicant is only recording of the video assigned by the opposite party No. 2 and victim hence the Section 376-D of I.P.C. not attract against the applicant. That the case of the opposite party No. 2 is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from weakness of case of defence. In case the evidence is read in totality and story projected by the opposite party No. 2 is found to be improbable, prosecution case becomes liable to be rejected. If evidence of opposite party No. 2 is read and considered in totality of circumstances along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have been committed, her deposition does not inspire confidence. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 24.02.2023 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 503 of 2022 under Sections 376-D, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 related to the Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli, during pendency of case. |
I, Shivani Maurya aged about 24 years wife of Shri Vishaal resident of Rahi, Police Station – Mill Area, District - Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the wife of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.12.2022 at 14.36 hours against the applicant which has been registered as Case Crime No. 503 of 2022 under Sections 376, 506 of IPC and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli with regard to incident dated 17.10.2022. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 02.12.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the prosecution story in nutshell is that; the applicant is the son-in-law of the opposite party No. 2 and as per allegations the applicant has bad eye on the property of the opposite party No. 2 and her another daughter also. On 17.10.2022, the applicant went to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and requested to stay there for resolving the issues, which were between them. When the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 raised alarm then she went to the room of her daughter where she found that the applicant was in the objectionable stage then her daughter informed that the applicant raped her twice thereafter the applicant and threatened for life and for viral the video recorded by the applicant. That the opposite party No. 2 lodged the first information report around 45 days after the incident without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report. Here it is relevant to mention that the opposite party No. 2 herself moved application before the State Women Commission instead of moving application before the concerned Police Station or other higher authority of the police. That the applicant submits before this Hon’ble Court that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in her first information report dated 02.12.2022. The first information report is highly delayed and there is no satisfactory explanation for the said reason. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 against the applicant on the wrong and incorrect facts in counterblast to save herself in retaliation of the first information report lodged against her by the wife of the applicant on 16.04.2022 and further create undue pressure on the applicant as the wife of the applicant has lodged a first information report against the opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 174 of 2022 under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli. The photocopy of the first information report dated 16.04.2022 lodged by the wife of the applicant against the opposite party No. 2 and another is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the opposite party No. 2 moved an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. before the competent court against the applicant, in which the concerned police gave a report on 16.11.2022 in which it has been stated that the opposite party No. 2 due to civil dispute, moving the application on false and incorrect grounds. The photo/type copy of the police report dated 16.11.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in her first information report dated 02.12.2022. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 against the applicant on the wrong, false story and for purpose of taking revenge from the applicant and his wife as the wife of the applicant has lodged the first information report against the opposite party No. 2 and another, who committed rape with her. That on 04.12.2022, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 has been recorded by concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she changed the version her first information report and introduced the two new accused including the brother of the applicant, who are friends of the applicant and also tried to improve her story to falsely implicate the applicant and others in alleged case crime. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That on very same day i.e. 04.12.2022, the statement of the victim has been recorded by the concerned police, who also repeated the statement of under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of her mother alongwith additional improved facts to falsely implicate the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. dated 04.12.2022 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That later on the medical of the victim was conducted by the doctor on 08.12.2022 in District Women Hospital, Raebareli, in which her radiological age has been ascertained as 17 years and there were no any injuries found. The photo/typed copy of the medical rape of the victim of the case crime dated 08.12.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the concerned court on 12.12.2022, in which she changed her statement of 161 of Cr.P.C. and again tried her best to improve the prosecution story with additional facts. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 12.12.2022 is being annexed as Annexure No. 7 to this application. That the statement of the opposite party No. 2 and victim given under Sections 161 & 164 is not trustworthy as both statements have several contradictions, which have been clearly showing the same. That the opposite party No. 2 and victim stated their statement under Section 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. that the applicant called their friends around 01.00 hours on 18.12.2022 however during investigation, when the investigating officer got CDR of friends of the applicant then found that no any call was made by the applicant and his brother, who has also named during the investigation. That during investigating of the case crime, the wife, brother and two friends have been named in the case crime and the Section 376 of I.P.C. deleted and Sections 376-D, 323, 504 of I.P.C. added and on 28.01.2023 the charge sheet No. 38 of 2023 has been filed against the applicant and investigating continued so far concerned to the other accused of the case crime. That the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 has been recorded by the concerned police on 01.04.2023, in which the investigating officer asked the some questions to the opposite party No. 2 regarding the alleged incident and involvement of the friends of the applicant and his wife, in reply to the questions put up by the concerned police the opposite party No. 2 has not given proper reply. The typed copy of the further statement dated 01.04.2023 of the opposite party No. 2 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer submitted another charge sheet No. 38A of 2023 on 01.04.2023 in which the name of the wife and two friends of the applicant dropped and his brother namely Vikas Maruya has been charge sheeted. The photocopy of the charge sheet No. 38A of 2023 dated 01.04.2023 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant and daughter of the opposite party No. 2 namely Shivani were in love and solemnized their marriage with the consent of the opposite party No. 2. That the mother of the applicant’s wife i.e. opposite party No. 2 wants to involve her daughter in flesh trading for she was not ready hence she annoyed with her daughter and applicant also. Meanwhile, the applicant was sent to jail in connection with a forged and fabricated case, then the opposite party No. 2 called her at home and thereafter her lover namely Ravi Shankar raped the wife of the applicant, in which the opposite party No. 2 helped him. That here it is relevant to mention that the opposite party No. 2 have only two daughters and elder is the wife of the applicant. That the opposite party No. 2 is also annoyed with the applicant and his wife as the concerned police have filed the charge sheet against her and another in connection with Case Crime No. 174 of 2022 on 26.07.2022. That the wife of the applicant i.e. daughter of the opposite party No. 2 has also filed several civil cases before the competent court of law against her mother i.e. opposite party No. 2 to restrain her as she was selling and gifting the ancestral property of her father to her lover or others. The details of the suit filed by between the wife of the applicant and the opposite party No. 2 are as under: Case No. 2476 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Rekha) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2834 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sangeeta Devi and another) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2387 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Rekha Devi and others) which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2124 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sheela and others) which is pending before competent court which is pending before competent court. Case No. 2476 of 2022 (Shivani Maurya Vs Sangeeta Devi), which is pending before competent court. Original Suit No. 959 of 2022 (Sangeeta Vs Shivani Maurya), which is dismissed on 02.11.2022. That the opposite party No. 2 and her lover tried their best to convince the wife of the applicant for withdrawing the civil and criminal cases, lodged by her but she is not ready for the same and when the opposite party No. 2 failed in their aim then she lodged the first information report against the applicant on false and incorrect facts. That the opposite party No. 2 and her lover are habitual offender and almost similar case has been lodged against them alongwith other accused bearing Case Crime No. 402 of 2022 under Sections 376, 328, 506, 120-B of I.P.C. at Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli on 18.09.2022. That after lodging the said first information report, in retaliation as a counterblast to the first information report dated 16.04.2022 lodged by the wife of the applicant, a first information report lodged by the opposite party No. 2 against the applicant. That while the several cases lodged by the wife of the applicant against the opposite party No. 2 hence there is no chance that the applicant went to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and she allow to him to stay at her home on 17.10.2022 as alleged by him. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from above mentioned case crime, in which the first bail application is being moving by the applicant, some other false and wrong cases have been lodged against the applicant, which are as under: Case Crime No. 381 of 2018 under Sections 323, 386, 411, 504, 506, 507, 147, 452 of I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5A of S.C. and S.T. Act related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 05.02.2019. Case Crime No. 217 of 2018 under Sections 386, 504, 506 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail in Bail Application No. 1046 of 2018 by the learned court below on 28.07.2018. Case Crime No. 409 of 2018 under Sections 323, 386, 504, 506 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 22.01.2017. Case Crime No. 450 of 2017 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act and 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 09 of 2020 under Sections 394, 506, 427, 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 06.02.2020. Case Crime No. 389 of 2017 under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 144 of 2017 under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 427 of 2017 under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 578 of 2016 under Sections 2(8)(1) and 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act related to Police Station – Fursatganj, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 157 of 2017 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 386 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 31.05.2017. Case Crime No. 160 of 2017 under Sections 352, 452, 394, 427, 336 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 09.06.2017. Case Crime No. 309 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act related to Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raiberelly, in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the learned court below as well as this Hon'ble High Court are annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge POCSO (Exclusive), First, Raebareli bearing Bail Application No. 1041 of 2023 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 24.04.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 24.04.2023 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members in malafide intention. That the case of the opposite party No. 2 is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from weakness of case of defence. In case the evidence is read in totality and story projected by the opposite party No. 2 is found to be improbable, prosecution case becomes liable to be rejected. If evidence of opposite party No. 2 is read and considered in totality of circumstances along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have been committed, her deposition does not inspire confidence. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 26.01.2023 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 503 of 2022 under Sections 376-D, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 related to the Police Station – Mill Area, District – Raebareli, during pendency of case. |
I, Raunak Singh aged about 20 years son of Shri Ramkaran resident of ilha, Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Farmer, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the Nephew/pariokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. The photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/ prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 09.03.2023 at 11.14 hours against the applicant which has been registered as Case Crime No. 52 of 2023 under Sections 363, 366, of I.P.C. related to the Police Station – Shivratanganj, District – Amethi. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 09.03.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the prosecution story, in a nutshell, is that, on 09.03.2023 at about 2.00 A.M., the applicant eloped the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 from the house of the opposite party No. 2. That the applicant submits before this Hon’ble Court that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in his first information report dated 09.03.2023. The first information report is highly doubtful and there is no satisfactory explanation for the said reason. That the statement of the opposite party No. 2 was recorded on 09.03.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which he almost repeated the averment of the first information report dated 09.03.2023. The photocopy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 dated 09.03.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 was recovered by the concerned police on 19.03.2023 and the concerned police in which the recovery memo was prepared, which creates doubt upon the action of the concerned police. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo of the victim of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That on the very same day i.e. on 19.03.2023 the statement of the victim has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which she stated that on 09.03.2023 around 02.00 hours she left her house with the applicant and solemnized marriage with the applicant in Temple at District - Ayodhya. The photo/ type copy of the statement of the victim dated 19.03.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That as per the statement of 161 of Cr.P.C., the victim confirmed that she was in a relationship with the applicant and that her family was against them. So with mutual consent, she decided to leave her house with her own WILL and solemnized the marriage with the applicant. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 in his first information report dated 09.03.2023. That the victim was medically examined on 20.03.2023 at District Hospital, Gauriganj, District - Amethi and her medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story. The photo/ typed copy of the medical report dated 20.03.2023 of the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 is being annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court on 22.03.2023, in which she was tortured by her parents therefore she leave her house with her own WILL with her boyfriend (the applicant) on 09.03.2023 and solemnized marriage on same day at District - Ayodhya. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 22.03.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the victim further stated that after their marriage went to Delhi where they resided for 6 days as husband and wife. Later on, the brother of the applicant brings back the applicant and her via a four-wheeler. That thereafter the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 has been recorded by the concerned police on 21.03.2023, in which he has given his explanation regarding the wrong name of the father of the applicant. That during the investigation of the case crime, Section 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 was added on 21.03.2023 by the investigating officer. That the concerned police have asked for the date of birth of the victim from the Principal of the victim’s school, which has been given stating therein the date of birth of the victim as 20.07.2006. The photo/typed copy of the reply given to the concerned police by the Principal is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer submitted charge sheet No. 72 of 2023 on 19.04.2023 against the applicant under Section 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. That the real fact of the case is that the victim stated that she is more than 18 years and she fall in love with the applicant and she proposed to the applicant and the same has been accepted by him and they loved each other and decided to marry. That meanwhile the opposite party No. 2 came to know about the relationship between the applicant and his daughter thereafter he has beaten the victim and locked her in his house. That thereafter the victim left her house on 09.03.2023 and came with the applicant and solemnized marriage in District - Ayodhya and residing in Delhi as husband-wife. That the victime of the case crime was brought to Amethi by the brother of the applicant despite a false story cooked up by the concerned police and the opposite party No. 2, showing that the victim has been recovered by the concerned police, in which the opposite party No. 2 is witness. That the opposite party No. 2 is well aware that his daughter i.e. victim is major in age but he has lodged the first information report saying therein that the victim is a minor. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant and for extraneous reasons, the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That according to the prosecution story, it is clearly revealed that the story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from the present case crime, in which the first bail application is being moved by the applicant, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had filed a application for bail before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, (POCSO Act) - II, Raebareli bearing Bail Application No. 1687 of 2023 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 25.05.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members in malafide intention. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2023 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 52 of 2023 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 related to the Police Station – Shivratanganj, District – Amethi, during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice. |
I, Jai Prakash Maurya aged about 28 years son of Shri Baijnath Maurya resident of Village – Bhitari, Post – Pariyawan, District – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the pairokar of the aforesaid case and he is nephew of the applicant and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the real name of the applicant is Amrit Lal Maurya but in first information report the name of the applicant mentioned as “Amat Lal Maurya”. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That The first information report is lodged by informant/victim namely Pushpa Maurya as the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 103 of 2015 under section 376, 313, 323, 504,506 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh on 29.07.2015 at 16:00 hours against the applicant/accused and 5 others family members. The incident took place near about 6 months ago. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 29.07.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, the informant as stated in her age about 20 years. The son of the applicant namely Praveen Kumar Maurya and informant have physical relation since 2 years and thereafter the informant became pregnant and requested to the son of the applicant to marry with her but he was denied for same. Thereafter the informant informed to the applicant and his family members and start living with the family of the applicant. That one day the all accused of the case crime forcefully fed a medicine/tablet and brings anywhere and made abortion and throw out from his house. That the informant was come back itself her father’s home and try to lodge the first information report but same has not been lodged even an compromise has been done for arranging the marriage, but thereafter the applicant and his family members are abusing and threatened for her life. That medical of the victim was done at District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh on 31.07.2015 at 02:00 P.M. and Supplementary Medical Report was prepared on 06.08.2015. According to supplementary medical report the “Radiological age is above 18 years and also no spermatozoa seen.” The photo/type copy of the medical report dated 31.07.2015 and supplementary medical report dated 06.08.2015 is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the informant/victim recorded on 10.08.2015 under section 164 Cr.P.C., in which the victim stated as per her first information report till live in applicant’s house and thereafter she change her statement and stated the his son Praveen give a medicine to her and furnished her abortion and sent her to his parent’s home. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. dated 10.08.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the victim clearly stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the applicant was not involve in the said case crime. The applicant is father of the Praveen due to this his name has been impleaded in the said case crime. That it is also clear in said statement, the applicant has not given any medicine to the informant and also not involved in furnishing the abortion of her. That in first information report, the informant stated she was brought anywhere for furnishing the abortion but in statement under 164 Cr.P.C. the abortion furnished at applicant’s house. That the real story of the case is that due to familiar reason as the father of the informant/victim was died in earlier age, her three sister are married and her brother solemnized his marriage and the informant avoided by her family, as such she is immoral lady and having physical relationship with unknown persons. That the informant pregnant during her enjoyment and for escaping herself from the defamation in social or village, she came to house of the applicant and falsely alleged against his son and threaten by her to applicant and his family for solemnize the marriage with son of the applicant, when offer of the informant rejected by the applicant. That after rejection of the proposal of the informant, she become annoyed and lodged First Information Report against the applicant and his family members on the wrong and incurred facts. That the victim as herself stated in her first information report dated 29.07.2015, she is major in age and has sound mind therefore she is not influence by anyone in regard to make physical relation but as she is not decent lady, she implicate the applicant and his family members. That the first information report lodged by the informant is too much delayed more than six months and during this period she never approached to any authority concerned to take appropriate action against the accused. That a false story cooked up by the informant and parent of the victim for obtaining the money form the state government, which is given to the rapped victim. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is innocent and due to obtaining money for the state government and from the applicant for withdrawing the case, falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant/accused is in Jail since 02.08.2015. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 03.09.2015. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 03.09.2015 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Jai Prakash Pushapar aged about 48 years son of Shri Chiraunhi Lal resident of Village – Gayaspur, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Gardner, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.04.2021 at 23.52 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant lodged a first information report against the applicant and several other persons on 03.04.2021 about 23.52 hours and stated that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 02.04.2021 and that time the team of Surveillance Cell, Prayagraj Zone met with the informant and informed that his team got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told the all 19 names of the accused and stated that from Parsipur Cowshed they are involved in the smuggling the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 around 16.40 hours at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and he was not present there and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 14 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021. That the impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021 is lodged after one day delayed i.e. on 03.04.2021 by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant were not present at the place of incident. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant in aforesaid case crime, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 24.06.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant and his family members were not supporting to a candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach, who has money & men power. That the applicant was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support alongwith his family but the applicant has denied for the same. That therefore the applicant has threatened by the village Pradhan candidate to face consequences of the denial and said that he will ensured that the applicant send to jail soon. That on 03.04.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That it further relevant to mention that the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 24.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1552 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and when Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.08.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That another accused Anoop Singh of aforesaid case crime has been granted bail by the learned court below on 14.07.2021 in similar sections. The photocopy of the order dated 14.07.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant has a criminal history except this false case and detail of the said case is as under: Case No. RC-2 (S) 2013/C.B.I./SC-1/New Delhi under Section 302, 147, 148, 149, 323, 332, 353, 506 and 201 of IPC read with 149 of IPC and 27 Arms Act, in which nothing has been found against applicant and he has been exonerated from the charges. The photocopy of the supplementary charge sheet filed by CBI is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Smt. Reena Singh aged about 40 years wife of Shri Chandra Pratap Singh resident of Village – Sheetal Patti, Police Station – Jethwara, District - Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is wife of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 695 of 2021 under Sections 285, 407, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh on 21.08.2021 at 17.40 hours against the applicant/accused and along with other 13 named persons. The first information report is lodged by Inspector, Special Task Force, U.P., Pragyagraj Unit namely Shri Atul Kumar Singh. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 21.08.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant and his team (other police personnel) got information regarding of below standard petrol/diesel tanker deliver at Tilka Automobile Essar Petrol Pump in furtherance said information, the team conduct raid at said place, were 4 persons have arrested. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the alleged recovery without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing good work of the police. That the real fact is that the applicant is poor person and was seriously ill. In his treatment he spends lot of money and was operated by the doctor concerned. The photocopy of the medical papers of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the applicant needed money for his and family survival due to which he started working at Tilka Petrol Pump from 15.08.2021 on daily basis @ Rs. 200/- per day. The Manager of the petrol pump offered the applicant, if he worked for two shifts, then he got Rs. 400/- per day. That the applicant needed money hence he accepted the offer of the Maganer and started working in two shifts form 18.08.2021. That on 21.08.2021, the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police without any rhyme and reason showing the involvement of the applicant in nexus of the supply of the below standard petrol and diesel. That the concerned police also found that the said petrol pump was running without having permission. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant has no concerned with any illegality, which was happening at petrol pump by the owners or other persons. The applicant was just daily basis employee in said petrol pump. That the applicant cannot be hold guilty, for the illegal activity of the owner of the petrol pump. That the applicant/accused in jail from 21.08.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant/accused has no concerned with recovered below standard petrol and diesel in any manner as such the Sections 285, 407, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. and 3/7 The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the applicant had applied for bail before bearing No. 1923 of 2021 the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (E.C. Act), Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 17.09.2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.09.2021 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern, he was just 5 day old employee of the said petrol pump. That the applicant having two children (i) Utsav aged about 11 years and (ii) Anjali aged about 13 years and pursuing their education and due absence of the applicant their education is badly affected. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. That the applicant has no criminal history and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 695 of 2021 lodged under Sections 285, 407, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. and 3/7 The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of trial. |
I, Pappu Saroj aged about 24 years son of Shri Ram Lakhan resident of Govind Rasoolpur, Police Station - Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – High School, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 222 of 2014 under section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C., 60, 63, 72 Excise Act, 3/4 Copyright Act and 103/104 Trade Mark Act registered at Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh on 01.11.2014 at 18:15 hours against the applicant/accused and 3 named persons and 4-5 unknown persons. The first information report is lodged by SHO Shri Amit Pandey, Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 01.11.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, on 30.10.2014 when the informant and his team (other police persons) on routine patrol, during patrolling he got information in regard of transportation of illegal liquor. On basis of above information the informant and his team arrested the applicant with 4 boxes of “King Krazy Dry Gin for sale in Arunachal Pradesh only, Maura Distilleries and Bottlers (P. Ltd.)” each boxes contained 48 bottle of 180ML and 3 boxes of Deshi bear of “Kingfisher Strong Premium Bear 500 ML for sale in Haryana only not for sale Uttar Pradesh” each box contained 24 bottle. That according to the first information report allegation against the applicant is driver of the vehicle, in which the above mentioned illegal liquor was recovered and at the time of arresting Rs. 150/- was also recovered from pocket of the applicant. That the applicant is poor persons and belongs to schedule caste, for livelihood the applicant purchased the vehicle Tata Ace on finance. The police persons always try to use the vehicle of the applicant free of cost when the applicant denied for same. Thereafter being aggrieved the concerned police persons falsely implicates the applicant in above noted case crime. That there is no concerned with recovered illegal liquor. On 31.10.2014 the concerned police contacted to the applicant and offered to move some household material from one place to another, on his request the brother of the applicant go with them with the vehicle. When his brother not came at home within time than applicant approached to the concerned police. Thereafter they falsely implicated in said case crime after demand of fare for transportation. That the applicant/accused in jail from 01.11.2014. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any independent eye witness of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster), Court No. 5, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 24.11.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 24.11.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Raghuveer aged about 53 years son of Late Bhagole resident of Village – Allopur Bukhari, Post - Gotnati, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Class 5th Pass, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.04.2021 at 23.52 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant lodged a first information report against the applicant and several other persons on 03.04.2021 about 23.52 hours and stated that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 02.04.2021 and that time the team of Surveillance Cell, Prayagraj Zone met with the informant and informed that his team got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told the all 19 names of the accused and stated that from Parsipur Cowshed they are involved in the smuggling the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 around 16.40 hours at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and he was not present there and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 14 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021. That the impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021 is lodged after one day delayed i.e. on 03.04.2021 by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant were not present at the place of incident. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant in aforesaid case crime, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 01.07.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant and his family members were not supporting to a candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach, who has money & men power. That the applicant was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support alongwith his family but the applicant has denied for the same. That therefore the applicant has threatened by the village Pradhan candidate to face consequences of the denial and said that he will ensured that the applicant send to jail soon. That on 03.04.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That it further relevant to mention that the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 01.07.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1551 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and when Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 11.08.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That another accused Anoop Singh of aforesaid case crime has been granted bail by the learned court below on 14.07.2021 in similar sections. The photocopy of the order dated 14.07.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant is pursuing his B.A. 3rd years and due to false implication of the applicant in the case crime, his career is in dark. That it is further relevant to mention that prior to conduct the raid the informant has not made entry in the police genera diary, which is already creates doubts upon the prosecution story. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Nagendra Bahadur Singh alias Nagendra Singh aged about 63 years son of Shri Raghunandan Singh resident of Village – Dhema, Post – Narayanganj, Police Station – Mandhata, District - Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – High School, Occupation – Former, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father/pairokar of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before this Hon'ble High Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 216 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Naseerabad, District – Raebareli on 04.07.2022 at 18.30 hours against the applicant/accused. The first information report is lodged by Nadeem son of Jaan Mohammad resident of Village – Udapur helmet of Virnawa, Police Station – Naseerabad, District – Raebareli (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 04.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant has given his truck having registration number UP 32 – AT 0053 to the applicant on rent of 1,10,000/- per month on 14.02.2022. The applicant has given one month rent advance to the informant later he not paid single penny to him even when he asked to return his truck then the applicant abused him and threaten for life. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the alleged allegation without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime. That on 05.07.2022, the statement of the informant has recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he repeated averments of his first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 05.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That on 21.08.2022, the investigating officer added Sections 420, 468, 471 of IPC in aforesaid case crime. That the real fact is that the applicant has no concerned with the alleged incident as alleged by the informant, which has been developed by the concerned police. That the applicant’s name is Vinay Singh while the first information report lodged against the Vivek Singh. That on 21.08.2022, when the applicant was at home, he was arrested by the concerned police and thereafter falsely implicate in the said case on basis of the Aadhar card. That the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police on 21.08.2022 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That here it is relevant to mention here that applicant has no concerned with alleged incident but the concerned police arrested the applicant and connected with the said offense for extraneous reason. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from instant case, in which this bail application being filed, against the applicant several false cases have been lodged, the details are as under:- The photocopies of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court and well as the court below are annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before bearing No. 2372 of 2022 the Sessions Judge, Raebareli but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 24.09.2022. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 24.09.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and has no concern. That all the sections, in which the applicant has been falsely implicated by the informant are triable by the first class magistrate. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 216 of 2022 lodged under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406, 468, 471, 420 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Naseerabad, District – Raebareli, during pendency of trial. |
I, Neeraj Kesharvani aged about 34 years son of Shri Rajendra Prasad resident of 27/6B/10/1, Bhulai Ka Pura, Teliyarganj, Police Station – Shivkuti, District - Pryagraj, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – 10th pass, Occupation – Glossary Shop , the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of the applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 19 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420 of IPC and 3/9 of U.P. Public Examination Act, 1998 at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar on 23.01.2022 at 13.10 hours against one named accused Jhinku. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 23.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the First Information Report has been lodged by Shri Rahul Mishra, Proctor son of Shri Ram Achal Mishra (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell, that on 23.01.2022 the UPTET examination was scheduled and going on. The informant came to know that in the morning shift i.e. 10.00-12.30, a proxy candidate i.e. Jhiknu was present in place of examinee and was caught during checking. That the statement of the accuse Jhinku was recorded by the concerned police on very same day i.e. 23.01.2022 in which is stated that he was giving examination in place of examinee Sandeep Kumar along with other proxies and also stated that one Sandeep Yadav son of Ram Shringar is managing the entire proxy group. Other arrested accused of the case crime namely Akhilesh Nishad & Monika Rathaur have given their statements but not named the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the accused Jhinku, Akhilesh Nishad and Monika Rathaur dated 23.01.2022 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is not named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant was not came in light till recording of the statement of the Jhinku and other arrested accused of the case crime. That on basis of the statement of the accused Jhinku and another, the Sections 467, 468, 471 of IPC has been adduced in the said case crime by the investigating officer on 23.01.2022. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 23.01.2022, in which he almost repeated his first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 23.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That as per recovery memo dated 24.01.2022, the investigating officer arrested the applicant and another accused Sandeep Yadav at Bus Stand Akabarpur, Ambedkar Nagar, along with his CPU, which was carrying by the applicant. The typed copy of the arresting-cum-recovery memo of the applicant and another dated 24.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That on bare perusal of the arresting-cum-recovery memo it is clear that the applicant has been endorse by the informer of the concerned police as friend of the accused Sandeep Yadav but he has been arrested by the concerned police and produced of the CPU of the applicant, which was brought his home by the concerned police on 23.01.2022. That the statement of the accused Sandeep Yadav has been recorded by the concerned police on 24.01.2022 in which he stated that the applicant was working for him and manipulating the images on the Aadhar Card & Admit Card of the examinee for the proxy examinees/persons. The typed copy of the statement of the accused Sandeep Yadav dated 24.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the confessional statement of the confessional statement of the applicant has been written/ prepared by the investigating officer on 24.01.2022 tallying with the statement another accused under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offence against the applicant whereas the applicant has not given any confessional statement. Thereafter, the applicant has been implicated in the instant case. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 24.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the alleged incident as stated by the informant in his first information report. That the real fact is that the applicant is falsely implicated in the case crime without any rhyme and reason by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant was running a shop in Prayagraj, where the accused of the case crime i.e. Sandeep Yadav visited but they are not friend and not indulged in any criminal actively as alleged by him against the applicant. That the investigating officer, on 23.01.2022 around 20.00 hours arrested the applicant from his house and also taken his CPU forcefully and brought him to District Ambedkar Nagar without any reason. That next day i.e. on 24.01.2022 at 13.35 hours, the investigating officer of the case crime prepared false and fabricated arresting memo, which there is no independent witness while as the applicant was allegedly arrested from the Bus Stand, Akbarpur. That in overexcitement, the investigating officer stated in the arresting memo that the applicant was has poly-bag, in which carrying the CPU on which his name was painted. It is very strange that the applicant has nothing except the CPU and which was carried itself in poly-bag, which is practically not possible. It is also relevant to mention that there is no reason to carry his CPU to the Ambedkar Nagar but at time of alleging against the applicant, the investigating officer overlooked it. That till date there is no forensic report is submitted by the concerned police, so far concerned to the alleged CPU, in support of their story as the applicant has not involved in any criminal activity as alleged by the concerned police and accused Sandeep Yadav. That on bare perusal of the arresting memo dated 24.01.2022, which is false and fabricated, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of alleged arresting of the applicant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 24.01.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Ambedkar Nagar bearing Bail Application No. 78 of 2022 is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 02.03.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged by the co-accused of the case crime and he has no concern with the said crime. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant has committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 3/9 of U.P. Public Examination Act, 1998 at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar is made out against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 19 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 3/9 of U.P. Public Examination Act, 1998 registered at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar during pendency of trial. |
I, Bharat Singh aged about 55 years son of Shri Jagdish Bahadur Singh, resident of Village – Kandhai Ka Purwa, Mohaddipur Balipur, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – IV Class Government Employee, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicants and doing pairvi of applicants in the above noted case and duly authorized by them for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicants before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicants have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours against the applicants and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 02.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant and his team (other police personnel) were on patrolling of the area vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. At that time the informant got information from his informant (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor and manufacturing equipments are stored in house of one Shiv Murti Yadav situated at Mohaddinagar and the applicants and other accused are doing business of the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 and arrested 7 accused from the spot and also seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicants were told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid, and on basis which the applicants are named in the impugned first information report. That the names of the applicants are shown at serial No. 1 and 2 respectively in the accused column in the impugned first information report dated 02.04.2021. That the applicants are common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicants were not present at the place of incident, the concerned police arrested the applicants from their village (nearby their house) without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing good work of the police. That the real fact is that the applicants are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for ulterior motive. That the applicants and his family members were not supported to one candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach and money & men power. That the applicants’ father was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support along with his family but the father of the applicants has denied for the same. That therefore the father of the applicants has threatened by the candidate to face consequences of the denial and he ensured that the applicants and his father will send jail soon. That on 01.04.2021, the applicants were in their village and discussing the election of his village pradhan candidate alongwith other persons nearby their house, at time the applicants were arrested by the concerned police and they have been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That it is further relevant to mention here that on bare perusal of the first information report it is clear that the first information report has been lodged on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours while in the 7th to 9th line of the contents of the first information mentioned that the informant leaved the police station vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. In this situation it is clear that the informant has lied in recovery memo, on which basis the first information report has been lodged. That the first information report lodged prior to the raid and preparation of the recovery memo, on basis which the first information report lodged against the applicants and others. That initially the first information report has been lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 and after moving the bail application before the court concerned in aforesaid Sections thereafter the concerned police added the Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and moved the application for taking the remand of the applicants and other accused on 14.04.2021. The typed of the remand application moved by the concerned police on 14.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That at time of alleged raid and preparation of recovery and arresting of the memo, the signatures of the applicants and all accused have not taken on the recovery memo, on basis of that ground four other accused have been released on bail by the court concerned. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the court concerned in said case crime are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the court concerned specifically stated in its orders that “tekur ds fcUnq ij vkosfndk@vfHk;qDrk ds fo)ku vf/koDrk ,oa ftyk “kkldh; vf/koDrk QkStnkjh dks lquus rFkk miyC/k izi=ksa ds lE;d :is.k ifj”khyuksijkUr fofnr gksrk gS fd QnZ cjkenxh esa fdlh Hkh vfHk;qDrksa ds gLrk{kj ugha gS] fof/k foKku iz;ksx”kkyk ls vis;dj ds ckor dksbZ fjiksVZ vHkh rd izkIr ugha gS rFkk dksbZ rfLdjk lh0Mh0 esa vaafdr ugha gSA” That when the four accused have been released on bail on said ground thereafter the concerned police prepared fake, fabricated and duplicate recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 and also took the signatures of the accused persons from jail. The photo/ typed copy of the forged and fabricated recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 prepared by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That in forged and fabricated recovery memo an endorsement has been made by the concerned police personnel mentioning that “QnZ ds vk/kkj ij eq0v0la0 49@21 /kkjk 420] 467] 468] 471] 272] 273 vkbZ0ih0lh0 60¼2½] 63] 60¼,½] 103@104 O;kikj ,oa i.; oLrq fpUg vf/k0 iaft0 djk;k x;kA” The concerned police person has signed there and mentioned date 02.04.2021. That initially the first information report lodged on the basis of the recovery memo under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 but during preparation of the forged and fabricated recovery memo, it has been mentioned that the on basis of the recovery memo Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. That in view of aforesaid mentioned facts it is crystal clear that the concerned police is manipulating/ creating the evidences against the applicants by preparation of the forged and fabricated i.e. duplicate papers to prove guilty of the applicants before the trial court. That statement of the applicants never recorded by the investigating officer but the applicants came to know that the statements of the applicants initially recorded on 02.04.2021 at 15.00 hours, in which they both have denied their involvement in case crime and willing to give their statement before the court concerned. The typed copies of the alleged statements of the applicants recorded on 02.04.2021 at 15.00 hours are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That thereafter the investigating officer recorded the statements of the applicants as he wanted to record, while the applicants have never given their statements, on 02.04.2021 at 21.00 hours in which the applicants have confessed their guilt and stated they are labors of the main accused of the case crime. The typed copies of the alleged statements of the applicants recorded on 02.04.2021 at 21.00 hours are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicants are in jail since 02.04.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicants. That the applicants have no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the informant has not arrested the applicants at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicants’ possession. That the applicants had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1034 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and when Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 then filed another Bail Application No. 1134 of 2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 19.05.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicants have no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicants have not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and they have no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicants’ conviction because they have not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are common man of the society. They have never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Bharat Singh aged about 55 years son of Shri Jagdish Bahadur Singh, resident of Village – Kandhai Ka Purwa, Mohaddipur Balipur, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – IV Class Government Employee, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicants and doing pairvi of applicants in the above noted case and duly authorized by them for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicants before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicants have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours against the applicants and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 02.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant and his team (other police personnel) were on patrolling of the area vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. At that time the informant got information from his informant (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor and manufacturing equipments are stored in house of one Shiv Murti Yadav situated at Mohaddinagar and the applicants and other accused are doing business of the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 and arrested 7 accused from the spot and also seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicants were told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid, and on basis which the applicants are named in the impugned first information report. That the names of the applicants are shown at serial No. 1 and 2 respectively in the accused column in the impugned first information report dated 02.04.2021. That the applicants are common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicants were not present at the place of incident, the concerned police arrested the applicants from their village (nearby their house) without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing good work of the police. That the real fact is that the applicants are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for ulterior motive. That the applicants and his family members were not supported to one candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach and money & men power. That the applicants’ father was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support along with his family but the father of the applicants has denied for the same. That therefore the father of the applicants has threatened by the candidate to face consequences of the denial and he ensured that the applicants and his father will send jail soon. That on 01.04.2021, the applicants were in their village and discussing the election of his village pradhan candidate alongwith other persons nearby their house, at time the applicants were arrested by the concerned police and they have been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That it is further relevant to mention here that on bare perusal of the first information report it is clear that the first information report has been lodged on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours while in the 7th to 9th line of the contents of the first information mentioned that the informant leaved the police station vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. In this situation it is clear that the informant has lied in recovery memo, on which basis the first information report has been lodged. That the first information report lodged prior to the raid and preparation of the recovery memo, on basis which the first information report lodged against the applicants and others. That initially the first information report has been lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 and after moving the bail application before the court concerned in aforesaid Sections thereafter the concerned police added the Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and moved the application for taking the remand of the applicants and other accused on 14.04.2021. The typed of the remand application moved by the concerned police on 14.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That at time of alleged raid and preparation of recovery and arresting of the memo, the signatures of the applicants and all accused have not taken on the recovery memo, on basis of that ground four other accused have been released on bail by the court concerned. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the court concerned in said case crime are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the court concerned specifically stated in its orders that “tekur ds fcUnq ij vkosfndk@vfHk;qDrk ds fo)ku vf/koDrk ,oa ftyk “kkldh; vf/koDrk QkStnkjh dks lquus rFkk miyC/k izi=ksa ds lE;d :is.k ifj”khyuksijkUr fofnr gksrk gS fd QnZ cjkenxh esa fdlh Hkh vfHk;qDrksa ds gLrk{kj ugha gS] fof/k foKku iz;ksx”kkyk ls vis;dj ds ckor dksbZ fjiksVZ vHkh rd izkIr ugha gS rFkk dksbZ rfLdjk lh0Mh0 esa vaafdr ugha gSA” That when the four accused have been released on bail on said ground thereafter the concerned police prepared fake, fabricated and duplicate recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 and also took the signatures of the accused persons from jail. The photo/ typed copy of the forged and fabricated recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 prepared by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That in forged and fabricated recovery memo an endorsement has been made by the concerned police personnel mentioning that “QnZ ds vk/kkj ij eq0v0la0 49@21 /kkjk 420] 467] 468] 471] 272] 273 vkbZ0ih0lh0 60¼2½] 63] 60¼,½] 103@104 O;kikj ,oa i.; oLrq fpUg vf/k0 iaft0 djk;k x;kA” The concerned police person has signed there and mentioned date 02.04.2021. That initially the first information report lodged on the basis of the recovery memo under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 but during preparation of the forged and fabricated recovery memo, it has been mentioned that the on basis of the recovery memo Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. That in view of aforesaid mentioned facts it is crystal clear that the concerned police is manipulating/ creating the evidences against the applicants by preparation of the forged and fabricated i.e. duplicate papers to prove guilty of the applicants before the trial court. That statement of the applicants never recorded by the investigating officer but the applicants came to know that the statements of the applicants initially recorded on 02.04.2021 at 15.00 hours, in which they both have denied their involvement in case crime and willing to give their statement before the court concerned. The typed copies of the alleged statements of the applicants recorded on 02.04.2021 at 15.00 hours are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That thereafter the investigating officer recorded the statements of the applicants as he wanted to record, while the applicants have never given their statements, on 02.04.2021 at 21.00 hours in which the applicants have confessed their guilt and stated they are labors of the main accused of the case crime. The typed copies of the alleged statements of the applicants recorded on 02.04.2021 at 21.00 hours are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicants are in jail since 02.04.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicants. That the applicants have no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the informant has not arrested the applicants at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicants’ possession. That the applicants had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1034 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and when Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 then filed another Bail Application No. 1134 of 2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 19.05.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicants have no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicants have not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and they have no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicants’ conviction because they have not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are common man of the society. They have never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya on 01.04.2021 at 10.16 hours against the one person namely Rajnath Verma. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report as he has committed any offence as alleged against the concerned police later on during the investigation by the investigating officer. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Motilal Verma, resident of Village – Trilokpur, Daffarpur, Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that son of the informant consumed the adulterated liquor between 30.03.2021 to 01.04.2021 and become ill. He was initially treated at Gossainganj, later on he referred to Lucknow but during travelling to Lucknow, the son of the informant died. That the name of the applicant was told by the arrested accused namely Riyaz Ahmad and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the informant lodged the first information report against the accused Rajnath Verma. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he given detail of the incident and stated that due to political enmity, the named accused given a party on 29.03.2021, in which he served and distributed adulterated liquor and after consumption of same, the son of the informant died on 01.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police, in which the informant changed his statement and reveal new names of accused. That during the investigating officer recorded the several statements of the witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. namely Ram Tirath, Pullu Kahar, Hriday Kumar Tiwari, Sanay Tiwari, Rakesh Verma, Bachcha Ram, Deepak Verma, Raju Verma and Mohd. Vaish but no anyone named the applicant in said case crime. That on 26.08.2021, the investigating officer recorded the statement of the accused of the case crime namely Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh, who first time named the applicant in his statement. The photo/typed copy of the statement of the accused Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is named in the case crime about five months due to extraneous reasons, while there no any concrete evidences against the applicant. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor as alleged by investigating officer due to extraneous reasons. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate, who was contesting for post of Chairman, Zila Panchyat, in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower/ supporter of the other political party, who is contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the investigating officer of the case crime, falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 22.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 24.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 01.04.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on basis of the statement of the Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station – Hathigawan, Police Station – Pratapgarh, whereas the applicant has no concerned with the illegal business as alleged by the investigating officer. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which almost all accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 3, Faizabad bearing Bail Application No. 1893 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 02.12.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 05.04.2021 at 02.09 hours against the applicant and 12 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 05.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Sub Inspector Shri Pramod Kumar Singh, Inchare SWAT Team, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) stated therein that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 03.04.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) with regard to huge adulterated liquor stored. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 03.04.2021 at alleged place of the applicant and seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis which the applicant is named in the case crime. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column in the first information report dated 05.04.2021. That the first report dated 05.04.2021 is anti dated as the raid was conducted on 03.04.2021 but the first information report lodged on 05.04.2021 by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate contesting for Zila Panchyat in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower of the other party, which is not ruling and contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner by the informant. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in case crime No. 48 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. That after 12 days of the surrender of the applicant, the investigating officer of the aforesaid case crime moved an application on 16.06.2021 for taking judicial custody of the applicant in case crime 124 of 2021, which was allowed. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 18.06.2021, while the investigating officer has not recorded statement as given by the applicant. The type copy of the alleged statement of the applicant recorded on 18.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That thereafter the investigating officer of the case crime No. 124 of 2021 has moved an application before the court concerned to take police custody remand on 28.06.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 29.06.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand on 30.06.2021 from 10.00 AM to 06.00 PM. That after taking in police custody remand by the investigating officer on 30.06.2021, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police mentioning therein that on pointing out of the applicant, 33 bottles of 750ml English liquor was recovered from an open place near his house. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 30.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against 12 accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet No. 228 of 2021 on 11.09.2021 without receiving the Forensic Science Lab report. That for the extraneous reasons, the applicant falsely implicated in said case crime for showing good work of the police and while as per best knowledge of the applicant till date the Forensic Science Lab report not received by the investigating officer. That under the political influence, after alleged raid on 03.04.2021, two first information reports lodged i.e. 124 of 2021 and Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh by the SHO, Kunda against the applicant and other named and unknown persons, for preparing the criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 have not applicable against him. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 30.06.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order granted by the court concerned and other related documents are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That the maximum accused of the case crime No. 124 of 2021 have been granted bail by the court below. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2058 of 2021 in Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 30.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 05.04.2021 at 20.43 hours against the applicant and other named and unknown persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 05.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Devendra Pratap Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) stated therein that the informant and his team on patrolling of area on 05.04.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor stored in shop situated between Babuganj Highway and railway line. That the raid has been conducted by the informant alongwith his team on 05.04.2021 at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at the time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis which the applicant is named in the case crime. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column in the first information report dated 05.04.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate contesting for Zila Panchyat in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower of the other party, which is not ruling and contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner by the informant. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in case crime No. 48 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. That after 12 days of the surrender of the applicant, the investigating officer of the aforesaid case crime moved an application on 16.06.2021 for taking judicial custody of the applicant in case crime 125 of 2021, which was allowed. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 18.06.2021, while the investigating officer has not recorded statement as given by the applicant. The type copy of the alleged statement of the applicant recorded on 18.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That thereafter the investigating officer of the case crime has moved an application before the court concerned to take police custody remand on 28.06.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 29.06.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand on 30.06.2021 from 10.00 AM to 06.00 PM. That after taking in police custody remand by the investigating officer on 30.06.2021, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police mentioning therein that on pointing out of the applicant, 33 bottles of 750ml English liquor was recovered from an open place near his house. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 30.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against several accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet without receiving the Forensic Science Lab report. That for the extraneous reasons, the applicant falsely implicated in said case crime for showing good work of the police and while as per best knowledge of the applicant till date the Forensic Science Lab report not received by the investigating officer. That under the political influence, after alleged raid dated 03.04.2021 conducted by the SWAT Team, two first information reports lodged i.e. 125 of 2021 and Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 by SWAT Team against the applicant and 12 other persons, for preparing the criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 have not applicable against him. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 30.06.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order granted by the court concerned and other related documents are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That the maximum accused of the case crime No. 124 of 2021 have been granted bail by the court below. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2057 of 2021 in Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 30.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 14.10.2021 at 12.45 hours against the applicant and 5 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 14.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Ram Adhar Singh Yadav, Sub Inspector, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that on 13.10.2021 the informant and his team was on patrolling of area and that time he got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told that behind the varsiya chicken shop situated at nearby Purnemau crossing, Hathigawan road, huge adulterated liquor has been stored. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 13.10.2021 at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor, which was buried and arrested one accused by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the arrested accused namely Riyaz Ahmad and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 14.10.2021. That the alleged raid/recovery made by the informant on 13.10.2021 and first information report dated 14.10.2021 is lodged after one day delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021, when the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021. That due to political reasons, the name of the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case crime on 14.10.2021, even when he is jail since 04.06.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate, who was contesting for post of Chairman, Zila Panchyat, in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower/ supporter of the other political party, who is contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner as he is jail since 04.06.2021. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 14.10.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 22.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 24.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2780 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 25.11.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 01.04.2021 at 05.32 hours against the applicant, another known and several other unknown persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant and his team on patrolling of area on 31.03.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer with regard of huge adulterated liquor is being prepared by the applicant and other persons and they are selling the same. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 31.03.2021 at 22.10 hours at alleged place of the applicant and seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 1 in the accused column in the impugned first information report dated 01.04.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate contesting for Zila Panchyat in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower of the other party, which is not ruling and contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner by the informant. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in aforesaid case crime and according to the case diary, the investigating officer after getting the permission from the court concerned, recorded the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 07.06.2021, while the investigating officer has not recorded statement as given by the applicant. The type copy of the alleged statement of the applicant recorded on 07.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police, in very illegal manner, the statement of the application recorded in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 place in all cases i.e. Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021, lodged by concerned police under the threat and pressure of the local politician as individual statement of each cases. That thereafter the investigating officer of the case crime has moved an application before the court concerned to take police custody remand on 09.06.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 11.06.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand from 13.06.2021 at 10.00 AM to 14.06.2021 upto 10.00 AM. The photocopy of the order dated 11.06.2021 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That it is very strange that in compliance of the order dated 11.06.2021, the investigating officers of the Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 approached the jail authority on 13.06.2021 at 09.46 AM and after medical, the applicant was taken into police custody remand at 10.15 AM. The typed copies of the relevant part of the case diary of Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 dated 14.06.2021 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That after taking in police custody remand, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police. In which on pointing out of the applicant, which is just 25 meter away (open place) from the recovery place of the Case Crime 50 of 2021, recovered huge amount of adulterated liquor and other related items. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 13.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against 5 accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet No. 66 of 2021 on 30.07.2021 without receiving the Forensic Science Lab report. That for the extraneous reasons, the applicant falsely implicated in said case crime for showing good work of the police and after more than 5 months the chemical report is received by the investigating officer of the case crime. On basis of the chemical report it has been found the alleged recovered liquor is not adulterated hence the Section 272 & 273 of IPC has been dropped by the investigating officer, which is mentioned in CD No. 39 dated 16.09.2021. The typed copy of the CD No. 39 dated 16.09.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. - 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 13.06.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1975 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 19108 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 22.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.04.2021 at 02.09 hours against the applicant and 12 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant lodged a first information report against the applicant and several other persons on 03.04.2021 about 23.52 hours and stated that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 02.04.2021 and that time the team of Surveillance Cell, Prayagraj Zone met with the informant and informed that his team got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told the all 19 names of the accused and stated that from Parsipur Cowshed they are involved in the smuggling the adulterated liquor and stored huge adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 around 16.40 hours at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and he was not present there and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021. That the alleged raid/recovery made by the informant on 02.04.2021 and first information report dated 03.04.2021 is lodged after one day delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant were not present at the place of incident. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant in aforesaid case crime, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate, who was contesting for post of Chairman, Zila Panchyat, in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower/ supporter of the other political party, who is contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in case crime No. 48 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. That after 05 days of the surrender of the applicant, the investigating officer of the aforesaid case crime moved an application on 09.06.2021 for taking judicial custody of the applicant in case crime 50 of 2021, which was allowed by the court below. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 10.06.2021, while the investigating officer has not recorded statement as given by the applicant. The type copy of the alleged statement of the applicant recorded on 10.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the investigating officer, due to political influence, written the statement of the applicant himself and stated that the applicant using the land gata No. 377 situated at Village – Imbrahimpur, District – Pratapgarh for his illegal activity. The investigating officer, himself wrote a letter on 08.05.2021 to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh seeking information regarding the ownership and use of the aforesaid land. That in response to the said letter, the report has been given to the investigating officer on 25.05.2021 by the concerned revenue officer, stating therein that the land is recorded in the name of Radha Krishna Ramjanki Kuti, Krishnaban in revenue records. The aforesaid report is the part of the case diary. The photo/typed copy of the report dated 25.05.2021 given by the concerned revenue officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That on perusal of the said report and alleged statement of the applicant, which is actually not given by the applicant, it is clear that the applicant has no concerned with the said land but due to political vendetta, the applicant investigating officer created/ prepared the false and fabricated evidences against the applicant due to extraneous reasons. That the concerned police, in very illegal manner, the statement of the applicant recorded in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 place in all cases i.e. Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021, lodged by concerned police under the threat and pressure of the local politician as individual statement of each cases. That meanwhile the investigating officer of case crime No. 48 of 2021 has moved an application before the court concerned to take the applicant in police custody remand on 09.06.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 11.06.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand from 13.06.2021 at 10.00 AM to 14.06.2021 upto 10.00 AM in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021. That it is very strange that in compliance of the order dated 11.06.2021, the investigating officers of the Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 approached the jail authority on 13.06.2021 at 09.46 AM and after medical, the applicant was taken into police custody remand at 10.15 AM. The typed copies of the relevant part of the case diary of Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 dated 14.06.2021 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the court below has been granted the police custody remand of the applicant in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 but without having any order passed by the court concerned, the investigation officer of the Case Crime No. 49 and 50 of 2021, took the applicant in police custody remand. That after taking in police custody remand, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police. In which on pointing out of the applicant, which is just 25 meter away (open place) from the recovery place of the Case Crime 50 of 2021, recovered huge amount of adulterated liquor and other related items. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 13.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That as the remand of the applicant was taken by the investigating officer of the Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 in furtherance of the order dated 11.06.2021 passed by the court below and as such the recovery was made during said police custody remand, it is related to the Case Crime No. 48 of 2021, not in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021, in any manner. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against 7 accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet No. 73 of 2021 on 25.08.2021. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession on 02.04.2021. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 13.06.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 22.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 24.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the several accused of the case crime have been filed bail before the learned court below in which one Anoop Singh, who have criminal history of 30 cases, granted bail by the court below on 14.07.2021. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which 10 accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 1, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2565 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 23.11.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharmendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 09.10.2021 at 23.42 hours against the applicant and 3 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 03.10.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 03.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Chandra Bhan Singh, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the applicant is active member of a gang, which was headed by the applicant himself along with some other members. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the single case i.e. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court on 06.12.2021. The photocopy of the order dated passed by this Hon'ble High Court 06.12.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column first information report dated 09.10.2021 as gang leader. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in connection with case crime No. 48 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant of the case crime NO. 50 of 2021. The said informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate, who was contesting for post of Chairman, Zila Panchyat, in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower/ supporter of the other political party, who is contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner, related to the case crime No. 50 of 2021. That the investigating officer of the case crime No. 50 of 2021, due to political influence, written the statement of the applicant himself and stated that the applicant using the land gata No. 377 situated at Village – Imbrahimpur, District – Pratapgarh for his illegal activity. The investigating officer, himself wrote a letter on 08.05.2021 to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh seeking information regarding the ownership and use of the aforesaid land. That in response to the said letter, the report has been given to the investigating officer of the case crime No. 50 of 2021, on 25.05.2021 by the concerned revenue officer, stating therein that the land is recorded in the name of Radha Krishna Ramjanki Kuti, Krishnaban in revenue records. The aforesaid report is the part of the case diary. The photo/typed copy of the report dated 25.05.2021 given by the concerned revenue officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That on perusal of the said report, it is clear that the applicant has no concerned with the said land but due to political vendetta, the applicant investigating officer created/ prepared the false and fabricated evidences against the applicant due to extraneous reasons. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic & also suffering from heart disease and was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 22.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 06.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 14.12.2021 passed by court below. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 24.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 09.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the statements of the accused persons, in which the applicant granted bail on 24.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, is present case. Another case has been lodged against the applicant, when he is jail, under the influence of the local politician on 14.10.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 10.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. The aforesaid 9 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted on 28.01.2020 by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 05.03.2011 by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The applicant has no knowledge about said case. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 04.03.2014 by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court & court below and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the several accused of the case crime have been filed bail before the learned court below in which one Anoop Singh, who have criminal history of 30 cases, granted bail by the court below on 14.07.2021. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 5, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 3023 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 13.01.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That it is further prayed that the requirement of filing an Affidavit along with the Application(s) may further be dispensed with in view of the Guidelines provided by the order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 09.01.2022. That in view of the guidelines of the High Court dated 09.01.2022 the details of the deponent of the affidavit as under: Aadhar No. - 690876641629 Card holder name - Dharmendra Pratap Singh Father’s name - Jagdish Bahadur Singh Address - Pure Gauran, Rautapur Raebareli Mobile No. - 979312508 (Link with adhar No.) - That the deponent further declared that after lifting the lockdown, he will be filed hard copy of the proper affidavit within one month. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Dharendra Pratap Singh aged about 37 years son of Shri Jagdish Babadur Singh resident of Pure Gauran, Rautapur, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 02.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant and his team (other police personnel) were on patrolling of the area vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. At that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor and manufacturing equipments are stored in house of one Shiv Murti Yadav situated at Mohaddinagar and the Applicant and other accused are doing business of the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 and arrested 7 accused from the spot and also seized lot of adulterated liquor and related items. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and on basis which the applicant is named in the impugned first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 8 in the accused column in the impugned first information report dated 02.04.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is a common man of the society and running his own business and also managing the business of his wife. The business of the wife of the applicant is in the name of Sarvto Bhadra Traders, which is dealing in house building material and also have a brick field. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the wife of the applicant was elected as Village Pradhan in last local body election held in year 2015. That it is further relevant to mention that in year 2017 during the State Legislation election the applicant opposed the present local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party) due to which he has enmity with the applicant. That the applicant was threatened by the present Member of Parliament to support his candidate contesting for Zila Panchyat in local body elections otherwise he would be suffer a lot but the applicant denied for the same as he is follower of the other party, which is not ruling and contesting against the present ruling party. That due to aforesaid reasons for building pressure upon the applicant and his family, the present Member of Parliament is misusing the District Administration/ authorities against the applicant and lodged the impugned first information report. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner by the informant. That on 01.04.2021, few persons have been arrested by the concerned police at the time of police raid and the statements of arrested accused persons have been recorded by the concerned police, who have also named the applicant. The typed copy of the statements of two arrested accused is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That it is further relevant to mention here that on bare perusal of the first information report it is clear that the first information report has been lodged on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours while in the 7th to 9th line of the contents of the first information mentioned that the informant leaved the police station vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. In this situation it is clear that the informant has lied in recovery memo, on which basis the first information report has been lodged. That the first information report lodged prior to the raid and preparation of the recovery memo, on basis which the first information report lodged against the applicant and others. That initially the first information report has been lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 and after moving the bail application before the court concerned in aforesaid Sections thereafter the concerned police added the Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and moved an application for taking the remand of the accused under said section on 14.04.2021. The typed of the remand u/s 60A application moved by the concerned police on 14.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That at time of alleged raid and preparation of recovery and arresting of the memo, the signatures of the all arrested accused have not taken on the recovery memo by the concerned police, on basis of that ground four other accused have been released on bail by the court concerned. The photocopy of the bail order passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the three accused have filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in Case Crime No. 49 of 2021, in which this Hon'ble High Court granted the bail to the accused. The photocopy of the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the court concerned specifically stated in its orders that “tekur ds fcUnq ij vkosfndk@vfHk;qDrk ds fo)ku vf/koDrk ,oa ftyk “kkldh; vf/koDrk QkStnkjh dks lquus rFkk miyC/k izi=ksa ds lE;d :is.k ifj”khyuksijkUr fofnr gksrk gS fd QnZ cjkenxh esa fdlh Hkh vfHk;qDrksa ds gLrk{kj ugha gS] fof/k foKku iz;ksx”kkyk ls vis;dj ds ckor dksbZ fjiksVZ vHkh rd izkIr ugha gS rFkk dksbZ rfLdjk lh0Mh0 esa vaafdr ugha gSA” That when the four accused have been released on bail on said ground by the court concerned thereafter the concerned police prepared fake, fabricated and duplicate recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 and also took the signatures of the accused persons from jail. The photo/ typed copy of the forged and fabricated recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 prepared by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That in forged and fabricated recovery memo an endorsement has been made by the concerned police personnel mentioning that “QnZ ds vk/kkj ij eq0v0la0 49@21 /kkjk 420] 467] 468] 471] 272] 273 vkbZ0ih0lh0 60¼2½] 63] 60¼,½] 103@104 O;kikj ,oa i.; oLrq fpUg vf/k0 iaft0 djk;k x;kA” The concerned police person has signed there and mentioned date 02.04.2021. That in view of aforesaid mentioned facts it is crystal clear that the concerned police manipulated/ created the evidences against the applicant by preparation of the forged and fabricated i.e. duplicate papers to prove guilty of the applicant and other accused before the trial court, which is illegal and same could not be treated evidence against the applicant in any manner. That the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 and according to the case diary, the investigating officer after getting the permission from the court concerned, recorded the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 07.06.2021, while the investigating officer has not recorded statement as given by the applicant. That it is further relevant to mention here that the statement of the applicant never recorded by the investigating officer in connection to Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 but the applicant came to know that the statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. allegedly recorded on 10.06.2021 by the investigating officer, in which the applicant confessed his guilty. The type copy of the alleged statement of the applicant recorded on 10.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police, in very illegal manner, the statement of the application recorded in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 place in all cases i.e. Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021, lodged by concerned police under the threat and pressure of the local politician as individual statement of each cases. That thereafter the investigating officer of the Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 has moved an application before the court concerned to take police custody remand on 09.06.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 11.06.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand from 13.06.2021 at 10.00 AM to 14.06.2021 upto 10.00 AM. The photocopy of the order dated 11.06.2021 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That it is very strange that in compliance of the order dated 11.06.2021, the investigating officers of the Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 approached the jail authority on 13.06.2021 at 09.46 AM and after medical, the applicant was taken into police custody remand at 10.15 AM. The typed copies of the relevant part of the case diary of Case Crime No. 48, 49 and 50 of 2021 dated 14.06.2021 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this Affidavit. That after taking in police custody remand in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police. In which on pointing out of the applicant, which is just 25 meter away from the recovery place of the Case Crime 50 of 2021, recovered huge amount of adulterated liquor and other related items. The typed copy of the recovery memo of Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 dated 13.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against the 13 persons accused including the applicant, filed the charge sheet on 27.06.2021. That the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant having severe Chronic Liver Disease (70% liver is infected) and high diabetic and he was under treatment. After surrender of the applicant, there is no proper treatment is being given to the applicant due to which his life is in danger. The photocopy of the medical prescription of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 51 of 2021 under section 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District - Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. In this case the name of the applicant came in light from the accused persons. Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodged on 09.10.2021 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician against the applicant. Case Crime No. 53 of 2004 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 343 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been acquitted by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 685 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 363, 120 of IPC and 3(1)10 of S.C. and S.T. Act registered at Police Station – Saurawan, District – Allahabad, in which the concerned police filed submitted final report in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 395, 397, 307, 323, 504 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 302 of 2011 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 19 of 2012 under Section 3(1) Gunda Act registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 18 of 2013 under Sections 302 of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned. Case Crime No. 20 of 2013 under Sections 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. Case Crime No. 21 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120B of IPC registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the final report has been submitted in favour of the applicant. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1763 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 10.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Sanjay Prarap Singh alias Guddu Singh aged about 38 years son of Shri Kunj Bihari Singh resident of Village – Purmai Sultanpur, Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh presently residing at House No. 20/71, Sector – 20, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Government Servant, Education – Intermediate do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is the applicant himself in aforesaid application and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case, deposed to hereunder. The photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association, Lucknow of the deponent is affixed on the affidavit and his ID proof is enclosed with the affidavit. That this is the First bail application before this Hon'ble Court and no any other bail is being before this Hon'ble High Court or at Allahabad or before any other High Court in India, pertaining to the same subject matter. That the First Information Report dated 02.04.2021 lodged by the informant as Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The photo/typed copy of the First Information Report dated 02.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the informant lodged a first information report against the several known and unknown persons on 02.04.2021 about 12.23 hours and stated the informant and his team (other police personnel) got information with regard to huge adulterated liquor and manufacturing items which were stored in house of the Shivmurti resident of Village - Mohaddinagar. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 and arrested 7 accused from the spot and also seized lot of adulterated liquor. That it is further relevant to mention that the applicant was not named in the first information report, his name comes light in statements of some arrested accused persons, who were arrested at time of raid. The typed copy of the statements of arrested accused is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the raid has been conducted by the informant alongwith his team on 02.04.2021 at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at the time raid. That the real fact of the incident is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime due to political enmity. The applicant is been implicate under the case crime in influence of one active member of the ruling party. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, due to their own persons reasons, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That nothing has been recovered in the regard of adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner by the informant. That the applicant has no concerned with the recovered liquor from the alleged place by the informant. That it is further relevant to mention here that neither any other evidence against the applicant nor there is hope to found by the investigation officer as nothing has been done by the applicant. That the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant is presently serving to the Central Government and is posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow. The photocopies of the fee receipts of the applicant’s children are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That during the investigation, the investigating officer added the Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, in the case crime. That the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That it is further relevant to mention here that on bare perusal of the first information report it is clear that the first information report has been lodged on 02.04.2021 at 12.23 hours while in the 7th to 9th line of the contents of the first information mentioned that the informant leaved the police station vide GD entry No. 21 dated 02.04.2021 at 20.48 hours. In this situation it is clear that the informant has lied in recovery memo, on which basis the first information report has been lodged. That the first information report lodged prior to the raid and preparation of the recovery memo, on basis which the first information report lodged by the informant. That initially the first information report has been lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 and after moving the bail application before the court below by other accused, in aforesaid Sections thereafter the concerned police added the Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and moved the application for taking the remand of the applicants and other accused on 14.04.2021. The typed of the remand application moved by the concerned police on 14.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this Affidavit. That at time of alleged raid and preparation of recovery and arresting of the memo, the signatures of the all arrested accused have not taken on the recovery memo, on basis of that ground four other accused have been released on bail by the court below. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the court concerned in said case crime are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 08 to this Affidavit. That the court concerned specifically stated in its orders that “tekur ds fcUnq ij vkosfndk@vfHk;qDrk ds fo)ku vf/koDrk ,oa ftyk “kkldh; vf/koDrk QkStnkjh dks lquus rFkk miyC/k izi=ksa ds lE;d :is.k ifj”khyuksijkUr fofnr gksrk gS fd QnZ cjkenxh esa fdlh Hkh vfHk;qDrksa ds gLrk{kj ugha gS] fof/k foKku iz;ksx”kkyk ls vis;dj ds ckor dksbZ fjiksVZ vHkh rd izkIr ugha gS rFkk dksbZ rfLdjk lh0Mh0 esa vaafdr ugha gSA” That when the four accused have been released on bail on said ground thereafter the concerned police prepared fake, fabricated and duplicate recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 and also took the signatures of the accused persons from jail. The photo/ typed copy of the forged and fabricated recovery memo dated 02.04.2021 prepared by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 09 to this Affidavit. That in forged and fabricated recovery memo an endorsement has been made by the concerned police personnel mentioning that “QnZ ds vk/kkj ij eq0v0la0 49@21 /kkjk 420] 467] 468] 471] 272] 273 vkbZ0ih0lh0 60¼2½] 63] 60¼,½] 103@104 O;kikj ,oa i.; oLrq fpUg vf/k0 iaft0 djk;k x;kA” The concerned police person has signed on said forged recovery memo and mentioned date 02.04.2021. That initially the first information report lodged on the basis of the recovery memo under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 on 02.04.2021 but during preparation of the forged and fabricated recovery memo, it has been mentioned that the on basis of the recovery memo Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. That in view of aforesaid mentioned facts it is crystal clear that the concerned police is manipulating/ creating the evidences against the accused of the case crimes including the applicants by preparation of the forged and fabricated papers to prove guilty of the applicant before the trial court. That till date there is no any chemical report stating that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under: Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, this is the present case, in which the applicant is being filing the anticipatory bail before this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station: Hathigawan District: Pratapgarh. The applicant name was not named in the First information Report his name was added by the investigation officer during the investigation. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. That the aforesaid 6 cases are recently lodged under the political pressure of the local politician. The applicant moved the anticipatory bail application in court below, in case mentioned at serial No. (i) to (iv), which are rejected by the court concerned except mentioned at serial No. (ii). Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this application. That in the similar case crime, this Hon'ble High Court granted the accused Diwakar Singh, Shubam Singh and Bharat Lal Yadav and 4 other accused have been granted on bail by the court below namely Manju Devi, Gyan Devi, Roli and Rati Devi. The photocopies of the bail order accused of the case crime passed by this Hon'ble High Court and court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That in similar sections this Hon'ble High Court granted anticipatory bail to applicant of the Anticipatory Bail No. 6690 of 2021 (Ramesh Kumar alias Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and another) vide order dated 28.07.2021. The photocopy of the order dated 28.07.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this application. That if the applicant will arrested, the applicant will suffer irreparable loss and injury as the applicant has not committed any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of anticipatory bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on anticipatory bail in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in the interest of Justice, during pendency of case. |
I, Shyam Singh aged about 28 years son of Shri Chobar resident of Village – Ratanpur Mohiddunpur, Police Station - Pasgawan, District- Lakhimpur Kheri, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the instant matter is not related to CBI/ prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That the deponent is the brother of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above-noted case and also duly authorized by the applicant. The deponent further declares that the contents of this instant application explained by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the second bail application of the applicant. The First bail application of the applicant bearing No. 3281 of 2020 has been rejected by Hon'ble Rajeev Singh “J” on 27.01.2022 with the direction of the trial court to conclude within one year. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or any other competent court. The photocopy of the order dated 27.01.2022 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail in relation to the first information report lodged by Pankaj Kumar son of Chhote Lal resident of Village - Ratanpur, Police Station - Pasgawan, District- Lakhimpur Kheri (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) on 14.06.2019 at 01.51 hours against the 22 persons including the applicant, baring case crime No. 281 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Pasgawan, District – Lakhimpur Kheri. The photo/ typed copy of the first information report dated 14.06.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the prosecution story, it has been alleged in the first information report dated 14.06.2019 by the informant that due to old political rivalry, the brother of the informant’s father namely Mahendra Singh was murdered by the father of the applicant, and 6 other person in the year 1984. The father of the applicant and others has been convicted of life imprisonment and they have been released on bail, which was given in Appeal, in which some have died. The informant further alleged that on 13.06.2019 around 16.15 hours when the informant and his two others were going to their pond at that time the applicant and 21 others have been assaulted upon them with a lathi, danda, and sharp weapons then the informant and his other brother runaway from the alleged place of incident and thereafter the applicant fired upon the third brother of the informant. The informant further alleged that another brother of the applicant, who was also named in the first information report, fired upon the informant, and a mob gathered at the alleged place of occurrence and runaway. That the aforesaid first information report has been lodged by the informant in counterblast for his and his brothers safeguard as against them on very same i.e. 14.02.2016, a first information report has been lodged bearing case crime No. 283 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 504, 308 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Pasgawan, District – Lakhimpur Khiri by one of cousin brother of the applicant. The photocopy of the first information report dated 14.06.2019 lodged against the informant and others is being annexed herewith as Annexure No.3 to this affidavit. That the injured was brought to the hospital for treatment where he died on 16.06.2019. That the body of the deceased was brought to the P. M., Shahjahanpur for conducting post-mortem on 16.06.2019, where the post-mortem was conducted by the doctor concerned. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 16.06.2019 is being annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the informant himself stated that he along with his brother were runaways from the place of the incident then there is no possibility he saw the applicant when he was fired as alleged by the informant against his brother. On a bare perusal of the site plan, it is crystal clear that there is no chance to see the applicant, at the time of the alleged incident. The photo/typed copy of the site plan of the case crime prepared by the concerned police is being annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police on 18.06.2019 and the alleged firearm has not been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The alleged firearm has been given by the informant himself to the concerned police at the time of arrest of the applicant who stated that at the time alleged incident, he snatched it away with the help of his brother. The typed copy of the arresting-cum-recovery memo dated 18.06.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police on 20.06.2019 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which the informant changed his statement and improved his prosecution story to falsely implicate the applicant and others. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 20.06.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the informant himself stated in his first information report that he was run away from the alleged place of the incident along with his brother to save his life as 22 persons have been assaulted upon them, later on, 18.06.2019 stated that he snatched the firearm from the possession of the applicant, which creates doubt upon his statement. That it is further relevant to mention that according to the informant himself, after firing upon his brother the applicant, the alleged firearm was used by the brother of the applicant as who have fired upon him and a mob gathered so far away from the alleged incident to save their life and run away from the incident then how the informant snatched the firearm from the applicant. That the statement of the brother of the informant has also been recorded on 20.06.2019 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., who has almost repeated the statement of the informant and tried his best to falsely implicate the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the brother of the informant dated 20.06.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the concerned police recorded the statements of several alleged eyewitnesses of the case crime on 01.08.2019, who supported the story of the prosecution but no one, said that the alleged firearm has been snatched by the informant from the possession of the applicant. The photocopies of the statements of the alleged eyewitnesses of the case crime are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That it is very strange that the eyewitnesses of the case crime reached the alleged place of incident after listening to the noise of the alleged incident, from their houses, situated around 400 meters away from the place of incident. That as a matter of fact the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the informant due to the malafide intention of the informant to save him and his brothers. That thereafter without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet No. 339 of 2019 on 13.08.2019 against the applicant and another, while nothing has been done by the applicant as alleged against him. Here it is relevant to mention that only 2 out of 22 people have been charge-sheeted while the concerned police produced a total of 73 witnesses of the case crime. The photocopy of the relevant part of the charge sheet dated 13.08.2019 showing the list of the 73 witnesses of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 302, 504, 506 of I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the real story is that between the applicant and the informant’s family have been enmity for a long year back and the father of the applicant and others have been convicted of life imprisonment in the murder of the brother of the informant’s father in the year 1984. That the father of the applicant has been released on bail and after releasing him the informant and his family members were not happy and they want to falsely implicate the applicant and his brothers to teach a strong lesson to the father of the applicant. That the applicant’s family has a monkey as a pet named ‘Languri’ and on 13.06.2019 around 11.00 hours entered the house of the informant therefore the informant and his brother along with another brutally beat the monkey who died. That the informant and his brothers were about 16.00 burying the dead body of the monkey at that time the applicant recorded a video said the incident and he was caught by the informant and others and then he was brutally beaten by them. When the uncle of the applicant tried to save him, he was also beaten by the informant and others. That thereafter an application was moved for lodging the first information report before the concerned court but due to extraneous reasons, it was lodged after lodging the first information report of the informant bearing case crime No. 283 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 504, 308 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Pasgawan, District – Lakhimpur Khiri by cousin brother of the applicant, in which the concerned police submitted the charge sheet No. 353 of 2019 on 28.08.2019 under Section 325, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. against the informant and others. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 28.08.2019 submitted against the informant and others is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That it is further relevant to mention that the informant and his brother Vinod, who is the alleged eyewitness of the case crime, and hardened criminals and have a long criminal history. The informant is a history sheeter having HS-32 Category – A of Police Station – Pasgawan, District – Lakhimpur Khiri. That the co-accused of the case crime namely Laxman died on 26.01.2020, when he was in jail. That the applicant is in jail since 18.06.2019 without any of his fault. That no crime is made out against the applicant as alleged in the impugned first information report lodged by the informant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive has been assigned to the applicant in the present case. That entire allegation as alleged in the first information report is false and frivolous. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is false and incorrect and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That the first information report has been lodged afterthought and after consultation, in order to falsely implicate the applicant and other accused persons. That the trial of the case has been initiated and statement and cross-examination of the informant have been recorded by the court concerned in which the P.W. – 1/ informant has not stated that he has not given the alleged firearm to the investigating officer at the time of arrest of the applicant. The photocopy of the statement and cross-examination of the informant given before the trial is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 12 to this affidavit. That in the aforesaid trial the informant/ PW – 1 changed his statement and stated that several persons of the village came to the alleged place of incident, in which he did not say that his family members also came to the alleged place of incident, who are allegedly eyewitnesses of the case crime. That all witnesses of the case crime are the interested witnesses as such merely on the basis of their statements and testimony, the applicant would not be pleaded guilty. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the informant. That this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 27.01.2022 directed the learned trial court to expedite the trial within one year. The copy of the aforesaid order has been served before the trial court but after passing more than one year, the trial is not concluded yet. That there is no chance to conclude the trial of the applicant sooner as till date only the informant has been examined as P.W. - 1 and yet 72 witnesses are in queue for their examination as such in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during the pendency of his trial. That the applicant has falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime and he has no criminal history ever. That the bail application of the applicant has been rejected by learned Session Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in bail application No. 257 of 2020 vide order dated 18.02.2020. The photocopy of the bail rejection order dated 18.02.2020 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish a personal bond and sureties to the entire satisfaction before the court if the bail is granted to him. That in view of the above-noted fact, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble may kindly be pleased to enlarge the applicant on bail in relation to Case Crime No. 281 of 2019, under Sections 302, 504, 506 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Pasgawan, District – Lakhimpur Kheri, during the pendency of his trial, in the interest of justice |
I, Girija Devi aged about 65 years wife of Shri Shitla Prasad Tiwari resident of Village - Phoolpur, Police Station - Jethwara, District- Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is mother of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case and also duly authorized by the applicant. The deponent further declares that the contents of this instant application explained by the counsel of the applicant as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is second bail application of the applicant. The First bail application of the applicant beraing No. 760 of 2020 has been rejected by Hon'ble Alok Mathur “J” on 20.07.2021. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or any other competent court. The photocopy of the order dated 20.07.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail in relation to the first information report lodged by Smt. Sudama Devi wife of Shri Ram Samujh resident of Village- Phoolpur, Police Station - Jethwara, District- Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) on 31.05.2018 at 13.13 hours against the 4 persons including the applicant, who are all family members, vide case crime No. 213 of 2018 under Sections 352, 323, 452, 504, 308 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh. The photo/ typed copy of the first information report dated 31.05.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the prosecution story, it was alleged in the first information report dated 31.05.2018 by the informant that the applicant is pattidar of the informant and due to enmity with each other, on 30.05.2018 at 08.30 hours the applicant and other accused of case crime for the purpose of the killing the husband of the informant, with lathi, danda, katta and axe, entered in her house and started beaten to her husband, in which he sustanined several injuries and they also given life threat. The injured brought to the hospital at District – Prayagraj for treatment. That the injured brought to hospital, where the medical report prepared by the doctor, in which 5 injuries shown. The photo/typed copy of the medical report of the injred dated 30.05.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That as a matter of fact the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the Informant due to malafide intension of the Informant and on the ill advice. That the first information report lodged after about 30 hours delay without giving any reason, which creates doubt upon the prosection story. That the statement of the informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the concerned police on 31.05.2018, in which she almost repeated her first informant report. The informant also said that her daughter has also sustained injury while she has not produced any medical report. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 31.05.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That during the treatment of the injured i.e. husband of the informant has died on 13.06.2018. That the post mortem was conducted on 13.06.2018 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh by the concenred docutor and as per post mortem report the casue of death of deceased “Asphysia as a result of anti-mortem injuries”. Here it is also relevant to mentioned that there is no any firearm injury found. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report dated 13.06.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That after the death of the injured the Section 304 of IPC has been added in the said case crime. That thereafter on 17.06.2018, the statement of the daughter of the informant has been recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she repeated the version of the first information report lodged by her mother. The typed copy of the statement of the daughter of the informant dated 17.06.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That thereafter without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant, while nothing has been done by the applicant as alleged against him and his family members. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 352, 323, 452, 504, 308 of I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 30.05.2018 without any of his fault. That no crime made out against the applicant as alleged in the impugned first information report lodged by the informant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case. That entire allegations as alleged in the first information report is false and frivolous. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant and informant are pattidar and having dispute rearding the land and others. That on 30.05.2018, the husband of the informant came to the house of the applicant and complaint that why the plough his land while nothing has been done by his family. That without listining anything, the husband of the informant started beaten him with lathi then on alarm of the applicant his family members came to save the applicant then the husband of the informant runaway. During running to his house, the husband of the informant fallen and sustained head injuries. That as per allegations of the informant, the incident took place in her house while the investigating officer not found blood stain in her house despite that the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant. That when the husband of the informant sustained head injuries then he brought to the hospital and on ill advise, with malafide intension, having found golden chance, the first information lodged aginst the applicant his family members after 30 hours of the alleged incident. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is false and incorrect and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That the first information report has been lodged afterthought and after consultation, in order to falsely implicate the applicant and other accused persons. That the trial of the case has been initiated and statements and cross of the informant have recorded by the court concerned in which there are several condradictions in her statement and she tried with malafide intension to prove guilty the applicant. The photocopy of the statement and cross of the informant of the trial are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That in aforesaid trial the informant/ PW – 1 chaged her statement and stated that the applicant had Katta while he came to her house while in first information report and in statement of 161 of Cr.P.C. stated that the applicant had axe, knife and danda. That on bare perusal of the aforesaid statements of the witnesses of the ongoing trail, there are several contradiction in the all statements, which are not collobrated with the prosecution story. That all are the interested witnesses as such merely on basis of their statements and testimony, the applicant would not be pleaded guilty. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the informant. That this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 20.07.2021 directed the learned trial court to expedite the trial. The copy of the aforesaid order has been given to the counsel for serving the same to the court concerned but after passing of about one year, the trial is not conculed yet. That there is no chance to conclude the trial of the applicant sooner as such in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. That the applicant has falsely implicated in in three other criminal cases apart from the instant case, which are as under: - Case Crime No. 41 of 2013 under Section 457, 380, 411 of IPC registered at Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has granted bail on 16.04.2013 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 225 of 2013 under Section 18/20 of N.D.P.S Act registered at Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh, in which charge sheet submitted under Section 22 of NDPS Act and the applicant has granted bail on 27.03.2014 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 211 of 2018 under Section 10 of U.P. Hooliganjism Control Act registered at Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has granted bail on 29.08.2019 passed by the court below. The photocopies of the orders passed by the court below are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the brother of the applicant, who has also named in the first information report, has granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 25.02.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. Case No. 9434 of (B) 2019 (Mohit Tiwari Vs State of U.P.). The photocopy of the order dated 25.02.2020 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the bail application of the applicant has been rejected by learned Additional District & Session Judge, Pratapgarh in bail application No. 1743 of 2019 vide order dated 24.09.2019. The photocopy of the bail rejection order dated 24.09.2019 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish personal bond and sureties to the entire satisfaction before the court, if the bail is granted to him. That in view of the above noted fact, it is clear that the applicant is innocent and his is in jail since 30.05.2018 as such it is expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. |
I, Vijay Kumar aged about 30 years, son of Shri Radheyshyam Shukla, resident of Village - Wakar Ali Ka purwa, Hamelet of Bishariya, Police Station - Hathigawan, District- Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case and also duly authorized by him. The deponent further declares that the contents of this instant application explained by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That this is third bail application of the applicant. The First bail application of the applicant bearing No. 2913 (B) of 2015 has been rejected by Hon’ble Shri Mahendra Dayal “J” on 23.09.2016 and Second Bail application beraing No. 10291 (B) of 2018 has also been rejected by Hon'ble Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh “J” on 04.12.2018. That the applicant in jail on the basis of first information report lodged by Shiv Bhawan Tiwari son of Late Ram Abhilash Tiwari resident of Village – Sariyawan, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) on 31.05.2014 at 10.30 hours against the six persons including the applicant vide case crime No. 117 of 2014 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. The photo/ typed copy of the first information report dated 31.05.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that the certified copy of the first information report dated 31.05.2014 is already on record as same has been filed with the first bail application moved by the applicant. That according to the prosecution story, it was alleged in the first information report dated 31.05.2014 by the informant that the informant solemnized the marriage of his daughter namely Sadhna (hereinafter referred as to ‘deceased’) with the applicant with lot of dowry. But the all accused of the case crime demanded Rs. 1 Lacs and LCD TV from the daughter of the informant and for same they were tortured her. In night of the 30/31.05.2014, the accused have brutally beaten the deceased due to which has died. That as a matter of fact the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the Informant due to malafide intension of the Informant and on the ill advice of his relative. That as a matter of fact the applicant or his family had never demanded any dowry nor had tortured the deceased for the alleged demand of dowry. That the applicant never demanded any dowry from the deceased or her family members and after this unfortunate incident’s information was given to the family members of the deceased as well as Informant and his other relatives were present at the time of preparing inquest by the concerned police. The photo/ typed copy of the inquest report dated 31.05.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the post mortem was conducted on 01.06.2014 about 03.00 PM at District Hospital, Pratapgarh by the concenred docutor and as per post mortem report the casue of death is shock and come due to ante mortem injuries. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of the several independent witnesses were recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they stated that the deceased committed suicide at railway track. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer of the case crime, the charge sheet was filed against the accused applicant and Radhe Shyam bearing charge sheet No. 15 of 2014 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 on 25.08.2014. The first information report was lodged against the 6 persons and only 2 persons including the applicant charge sheeted. The photo/ typed copy of the charge sheet dated 25.08.2014 filed by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That it is further relevant to mention that the concerned police prepared 2 site plans fisrt is related to house of the applicant, where the applicant his family members brought the dead body of the deceased. The photo/typed copy of the site plan - I prepared by the investigating officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the second site plan is related to railway track, where the deceased committed suicide. The investigation officer found several stones at incident place and blood stains from the incident place, which is fully supported the version of the applicant and fully against the prosecution story. The photo/typed copy of the site plan - II prepared by the investigating officer is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That on perusal of the charge sheet, it is clear that the informant has named the accused persons in alleged case crime, in a very casual manner and without ascertaining the facts. That prior to the date of incident neither deceased nor informant has filed any complaint or police report was never filed either with the police or any other competent authority for any cruelty or demand of dowry, which creates doubts upon the prosecution story. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 02.06.2014 without any of his fault. That no crime made out against the applicant as alleged in the impugned first information report lodged by the informant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case. That the applicant has no criminal history at all except to this present case. That entire allegations as alleged in the first information report is false and frivolous. There was neither any demand of dowry nor the deceased was harassed in any manner. That the real fact of the case is that the deceased was suffering from several disease prior to the marriage and after marriage with the applicant, she has been provided the medical treatment by the applicant as per his financial position. The informant concealed the said fact with the applicant and his family prior to marriage. That on 11.01.2014, the deceased Sadhna Shukla has delivered one baby namely Yash Shukla but the son was also very much ill. The applicant has also provided the medical treatment to the mother and son to his label best. That the deceased requested his father i.e. the informant to help in treatment of her son but the informant denied very roudly due to which the deceased was also tensionised. That by time, the sadness of the deceased was increased day by day due illness of her son and she gone in deep depression. On mid-night of the 30/21.05.2014m when the all family members were sleeping at home and deceased leave the house and went to nearby the railway track and she hit herself with train and died due to several deadly injuries. That the informant was informed immediately after said unfortunate incident but the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and his family members. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the family members of the applicant are common persons and hardly earn sufficient for their livelihood at this stage allegation regarding demand of one lac rupee, LCD TV are not sustained. That, the applicant has moved his bail application before Sessions Judge Pratapgarh and which has rejected on 15.09.2014 by the Session Judge, Pratapgarh. The certified copy of bail rejection order passed by the court concerned has already filed along with first bail application before this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant has filed First bail application bearing No. 2913 (B) of 2015 has been rejected by Hon’ble Shri Mahendra Dayal “J” on 23.09.2016 and Second Bail application beraing No. 10291 (B) of 2018 has also been rejected by Hon'ble Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh “J” on 04.12.2018. The photocopy of the order dated 23.06.2016 & 04.12.2018 passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the trial of the case has been initiated and statements and cross of the informant and other witnesses have recorded by the court concerned in which they all are stand with their statements under Sections 161 of Cr.P.C., with malafide intension to prove guilty the applicant. The photocopies of the statement and cross of the witnesses Shiv Bhavan Tiwari and Sandeep Kumar Tiwari of the trial are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the then Sub Divisional Magistrate, who was present at time of inquest of the deceased namely Pradeep Kumar Singh, has been exmined by the trial court, who also state the family of the deceased were also present at time of inquest. The photocopy of the statement and cross of the witness Pradeep Kumar Singh of the trial is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the informant of the case again examined by the trial court on 07.01.2019, in which he change his statement, which was given earlier before the trial court and given several contradictive statements and adduced new facts and averment, which are never came in light earlier. The photocopy of the further statement and cross of the witness Shiv Bhanvan Tiwari of the trial is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That on bare perusal of the aforesaid statements of the witnesses of the ongoing trail, there are several contradiction in the all statements, which are not collobrated with the prosecution story. That all are the interested witnesses as such merely on basis of their statements and testimony, the applicant would not be pleaded guilty. That the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons, which has been discussed hereinabove but the informant and his family members falsely implecated the applicant and his family in said case with malafide intension. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the Informant. That this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 04.12.2018 directed the learned trial court to expedite the trial and conclude the same within one year. The certified copy of the aforesaid order has been served to the court concerned but but after more than one and half year, the trial is not conculed yet. That the applicant is suffering from the piles since long back and due to excessive bleeding from piles he was reffered fron Jail Hospital to District Hospital, Pratapgarh. The applicant is diagnosed as ‘severe anemia” and his haemoglobin is just 5.2 insted of 13-17 g/dL. And due to seriousness of the applicant’s piles, he has been referred to the S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj by the District Hospital, Pratapgarh on 16.07.2020. Now the applicant is under treatment at Prayagraj and his operation was scheduled but due to unavibilety of the bed his operation is postponed as the patients of Covid-19 are under treatment in S.R.N. Hospital. The photocopy of the medical reports of the applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That now these days due to Covid-19, the trial court is not properly working therefore there is no chance to conclude the trial of the applicant as directed by this Hon'ble High Court as such in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish personal bond and sureties to the entire satisfaction before the court, if the bail is granted to him. That in view of the above noted fact, it is clear that the applicant is innocent and his is in jail since 02.06.2014 as such it is expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. |
I, Sanjay Kumar Singh aged about 32 years son of Shri Raj Bux Singh resident of 741/16, New Rana Nagar, District – Rae Bareilly , Religion – Hindu, Qualification – B.A., Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is pairokar of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C., 60, 63, 72 Excise Act, 3/4 Copyright Act and 103/104 Trade Mark Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh on 01.02.2016 at 14:00 hours against the applicant/accused and along with other 14 named persons. The first information report is lodged by Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey, In-charge, Surveillance Cell. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 01.02.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, in nutshell, that one Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey, In-charge, Surveillance Cell recovered some illicit country made liquor within the limits of Police Station – Shivkuti, District – Allahabad on 31.01.2016 in a surprised raid conducted by him and a first information report was registered at Police Station – Shivkuti, District – Allahabad bearing case crime No. 35 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C. and under Sections 60, 72 of the U.P. Excise Act and under Section 62 Copy Right Act, 1957. One accused person at Police Station – Shivkuti, District – Allahabad told that the illicit liquor was being prepared at the old rice mill of the Sudhakar Singh & Diwakar Singh sons of Shri Kunj Bihari Singh resident of Village – Purmai Sultanpur, Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh and it is supplied from there by certain other persons. That on 01.02.2016, Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey, In-charge, Surveillance Cell and his team (other police personnel) got information in regard of huge Adulterated liquor, rapper and equipment for packaging/making liquor in rice mill of said Sudhakar Singh & Diwakar Singh and his team raid at said rice mill where the 15 persons are arrested on the spot including the applicant, they were working with the adulterated liquor. That the applicant is poor person and belongs came from West Bengal for livelihood he was working as labor at Mineral Water Plant which was beside of the said rice mill and during the raid, the concerned police arrested the applicant without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing good work of the police. That there is no concerned with recovered illegal liquor in any manner with the applicant as he was not arrested on the crime spot as stated by the concerned police in first information report, the police concerned falsely implicated in said case crime. That it is very strange as till 04.03.2016, the recovered liquor has neither sent for the Tanki test nor is forensic test, this fact admitted by the investigating officer of the said case crime by his parcha No. 9 dated 04.03.2016 of the case diary of the case crime. The photocopy of the parcha No. 9 dated 04.03.2016 of the case diary of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That thereafter on 23.03.2016, the Tanki test has been conducted by the Excise Inspector, Circle – III, Kunda, Pratapgarh on the both liquor i.e. country made and foreign and nothing has been found in recovered liquor which was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. The photocopy of the Tanki test dated 23.03.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That thereafter on 06.04.2016, the sample of the alleged illicit liquor has been sent to the forensic lab for testing and till date the report is awaiting from the forensic lab. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer filed charge sheet No. 09 of 2016 dated 08.04.2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C., 60, 63, 72 Excise Act, 3/4 Copyright Act and 103/104 Trade Mark Act against the applicant/accused and others 14 persons. That the applicant/accused in jail from 01.02.2016. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any independent eye witness of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant/accused has no concerned with recovered illicit liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C., 60, 63, 72 Excise Act, 3/4 Copyright Act and 103/104 Trade Mark Act have not followed him. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is poor man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 5, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 14.04.2016. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 14.04.2016 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Ashok Kumar aged about 42 years son of Shri Ram Swaroop resident of Village – Kanikamau, Police Station – Gangaghat, District - Unnao, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of the applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 17 of 2021 under Sections 323, 308, 427, 506 of IPC at Police Station – Gangaghat, District – Unnao on 20.01.2021 at 19.0 hours against the applicant and three other accused persons with regard to incident dated 19.01.2021. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 20.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Govind son of late Maiku Kori (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell, that on 19.01.2021, the son of the informant was returning to his home by his motorcycle on which one Surendra was also with his son. When the son of the informant blow the horn for pass then applicant and other accused of the case crime brutally assaulted upon the son of the informant, in which he sustained several severe injuries. The informant further alleged that the mobile of his son and Rs. 4000/- also misplaced during said incident. That the first information report lodged after one day without giving explanation of the delay, which is creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the alleged incident as stated by the informant in his first information report. That the injured was brought to the District Hospital, Unnao for the treatment by the concerned police. The medical of the injured conducted on 20.01.2021, in which the four injuries shown. According to the medical report, two injuries were fresh and one was recorded as one day old. The photo/typed copy of the medical report of injured dated 20.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 21.01.2021, in which he almost repeated his first information report and also stated that his son was driving his own motorcycle and stated that one accused Ram Lakhan son of Lakhan not involved in the alleged crime. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 21.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That it is very strange that after the incident the informant known about all accused and lodged the first information report by name and very next of lodging first information report he also investigate the matter and found that one accused was not involved in the case crime. That the son of the informant has recorded his statement before the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 28.01.2021, in which he also repeated version of the first information report in his own words and also stated that after his investigation he found that Ram Lakhan was not present at time of incident. The typed copy of the statement of the injured dated 28.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That after one month the statement of the Surendra, who was on the motorcycle of the informant’s son on alleged incident dated 19.01.2021, recorded by the concerned police on 20.02.2021, in which he stated that his motorcycle was driving by the son of the informant and after blowing the horn, the applicant and others accused annoyed and assaulted upon the injured and he runaway from the incident. The typed copy of the statement of the alleged eyewitness Surendra dated 20.02.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That there is contradiction between the statement of the informant and alleged eyewitness that they both claimed that motorcycle belongs to him. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime without any rhyme and reason due to village party bandi, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That on 19.01.2021, the son of informant, when returning to his home, driving very negligently due to which the applicant scolded him. That the after few meter away from the village of the applicant, the son of the informant hit someone then he was beaten by the unknown person and then the enemy of the applicant found golden chance to implicate the applicant in said case crime. That due to enmity with the applicant’s family the informant for taking revenge from the applicant, lodged a first information report against the him. That in result thereof, the informant ultimately falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, which is baseless and illegal due to enmity with family members of the applicant. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of alleged incident, however, the several eyewitness have been produced by the concerned police but no one helped the son of the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 23.01.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the incident and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 23.01.2021 and without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others accused bearing No. 60 of 2021 on 10.03.2021. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Criminal Case No. 1246 of 2012 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., related to Police Station – Ganga Ghat, District – Unnao, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 03.01.2019 by the court below. Case Crime No. 382 of 2018 under Sections 323, 504, 427 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Ganga Ghat, District – Unnao, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 29.11.2021 by the court below. Case Crime No. 2154 of 2012 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Ganga Ghat, District – Unnao, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 26.11.2021 by the court below. Criminal Case No. 9245 of 2010 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., related to Police Station – Ganga Ghat, District – Unnao, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 15.03.2016 by the court below. Case Crime No. 2963 of 2010 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station – Ganga Ghat, District – Unnao, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 10.11.2010 by the court below. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That during the Covid-19, in compliance of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 1 of 2020, the applicant was released on payroll on 12.05.2021 and he surrendered before the court concerned on 05.10.2021. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Unnao bearing Bail Application No. 187 of 2021 is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 26.03.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant is the father of the two small children and during this global pandemic they are left alone and the life of the applicant is also in danger in jail as the Covid-19 spreading is too high in jails. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 17 of 2021 under Sections 323, 308, 427, 506 of IPC registered at Police Station – Gangaghat, District – Unnao during pendency of trial. |
I, Sandeep Singh aged about 21 years son of Shri Kanhaiya Bux Singh resident of Tikiriya Bujurg Kanava, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya on 01.04.2021 at 10.16 hours against the one person namely Rajnath Verma. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report as he has committed any offence as alleged against the concerned police later on during the investigation by the investigating officer. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Motilal Verma, resident of Village – Trilokpur, Daffarpur, Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that son of the informant consumed the adulterated liquor between 30.03.2021 to 01.04.2021 and become ill. He was initially treated at Gossainganj, later on he referred to Lucknow but during travelling to Lucknow, the son of the informant died. That the name of the applicant was told by the arrested accused namely Ravi Verma and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the informant lodged the first information report against the accused Rajnath Verma. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he given detail of the incident and stated that due to political enmity, the named accused given a party on 29.03.2021, in which he served and distributed adulterated liquor and after consumption of same, the son of the informant died on 01.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police, in which the informant changed his statement and reveal new names of accused. That during the investigating officer recorded the several statements of the witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. namely Ram Tirath, Pullu Kahar, Hriday Kumar Tiwari, Sanay Tiwari, Rakesh Verma, Bachcha Ram, Deepak Verma, Raju Verma, Mohd. Vaish and Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh but no anyone named the applicant in said case crime. That later on 02.09.2021, the statement of co-accused Ravi Verma has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he stated that Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh told him that the applicant and Guddu Singh are involved in business of adulterated liquor. The typed copy of the statement of the co-accused Ravi Verma is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh has not named the applicant, in his statement dated 26.08.2021 but the concerned police named the applicant due to extraneous reasons in said case crime. The photo/typed copy of the statement of the accused Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is named in the case crime after five months due to extraneous reasons, while there no any concrete evidences against the applicant. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor as alleged by investigating officer due to extraneous reasons. That the applicant named in said case crime only for reason that another accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh, who have political enmity with the local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party), who is cousin brother. That the concerned police building the pressure upon co-accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh falsely implicate the applicant in said case crime due to ulterior motive under the political pressure. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the investigating officer of the case crime, falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 11.11.2021 after surrender in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2021, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 13.12.2021 passed by court below. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which bail application is pending before court below. Case Crime No. 122 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 20.07.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.12.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 412 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which is bail application is pending before the court below. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, this is present case, in which the applicant is being filed before this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which almost all accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 3, Faizabad bearing Bail Application No. 2158 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 04.01.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Sandeep Singh aged about 21 years son of Shri Kanhaiya Bux Singh resident of Tikiriya Bujurg Kanava, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya on 01.04.2021 at 10.16 hours against the one person namely Rajnath Verma. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report as he has committed any offence as alleged against the concerned police later on during the investigation by the investigating officer. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Motilal Verma, resident of Village – Trilokpur, Daffarpur, Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that son of the informant consumed the adulterated liquor between 30.03.2021 to 01.04.2021 and become ill. He was initially treated at Gossainganj, later on he referred to Lucknow but during travelling to Lucknow, the son of the informant died. That the name of the applicant was told by the arrested accused namely Ravi Verma and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the informant lodged the first information report against the accused Rajnath Verma. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he given detail of the incident and stated that due to political enmity, the named accused given a party on 29.03.2021, in which he served and distributed adulterated liquor and after consumption of same, the son of the informant died on 01.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police, in which the informant changed his statement and reveal new names of accused. That during the investigating officer recorded the several statements of the witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. namely Ram Tirath, Pullu Kahar, Hriday Kumar Tiwari, Sanay Tiwari, Rakesh Verma, Bachcha Ram, Deepak Verma, Raju Verma, Mohd. Vaish and Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh but no anyone named the applicant in said case crime. That later on 02.09.2021, the statement of co-accused Ravi Verma has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he stated that Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh told him that the applicant and Guddu Singh are involved in business of adulterated liquor. The typed copy of the statement of the co-accused Ravi Verma is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh has not named the applicant, in his statement dated 26.08.2021 but the concerned police named the applicant due to extraneous reasons in said case crime. The photo/typed copy of the statement of the accused Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is named in the case crime after five months due to extraneous reasons, while there no any concrete evidences against the applicant. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor as alleged by investigating officer due to extraneous reasons. That the applicant named in said case crime only for reason that another accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh, who have political enmity with the local Member of Parliament (i.e. ruling party), who is cousin brother. That the concerned police building the pressure upon co-accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh falsely implicate the applicant in said case crime due to ulterior motive under the political pressure. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the investigating officer of the case crime, falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 11.11.2021 after surrender in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2021, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 13.12.2021 passed by court below. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which bail application is pending before court below. Case Crime No. 122 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 20.07.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.12.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 412 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which is bail application is pending before the court below. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, this is present case, in which the applicant is being filed before this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which almost all accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 3, Faizabad bearing Bail Application No. 2158 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 04.01.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Rikki Singh aged about 20 years son of Shri Kanhaiya Baks Singh resident of Tikariya Bujurg, Post - Kanava, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That on 13.05.2022 at about 22.59 Hours, the informant Shri Krishna Kumar Mishra Station House Officer, Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya lodged a first information report against 6 persons including the applicant at Case Crime No. 128 of 2021 under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to ‘Gangster Act’) in Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. The certified and typed copy of the first information report dated 13.05.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, the applicant is member of a gang and he used to committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That prior to lodging the aforesaid case crime against the applicant, the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Ayodhya on 11.05.2022. The photocopy of the gang chart dated 11.05.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That for proper adjudication of the case it is submitted that the applicant is totally innocent and does not commit any offence as alleged in the first information report by the informant. That here it is also relevant to mention that the aforesaid case crime has been lodged on the basis of the Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Gosainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 24.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopy of the order dated 24.12.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That during the investigation of the Case Crime No. 107 of 2021, the investigating officer recorded the several statements of the witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. namely Ram Tirath, Pullu Kahar, Hriday Kumar Tiwari, Sanay Tiwari, Rakesh Verma, Bachcha Ram, Deepak Verma, Raju Verma and Mohd. Vaish but no anyone named the applicants in said case crime. That later on 02.09.2021, the statement of co-accused Ravi Verma of Case Crime 107 of 2021 has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he stated that Kuwanr Mahendra Pratap Singh alias Chandan Singh told him that the applicant is involved in business of adulterated liquor. That later on basis of the statements of witnesses of the Case Crime No. 107 of 2021, the investigating officer of the Case Crime No. 107 of 2021, named the applicant in case crime only on presumption basis in illegal manner for extraneous reasons. That the concerned police of the Police Station – Gosainganj, earlier also lodged a first information report bearing Case Crime No. 217 of 2021 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 on 27.07.2021 against the 10 person in relation to the Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya. The photocopy of the first information report dated 27.07.2021 lodged at Police Station – Gosainganj, District – Ayodhya is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That after lodging the first information report against the applicant, he challenged the same before this Hon'ble High Court bearing Writ Petition No. 3843 (CRLP) of 2022, which is still pending. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor as alleged by investigating officer due to extraneous reasons. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the investigating officer of the case crime, falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime, on the instructions of the present Member of Parliament, which is baseless and illegal due to ulterior motive. That the applicant is in jail since 17.01.2023 after surrender, without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 13.12.2021 passed by court below. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which bail application is pending before court below. Case Crime No. 122 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 20.07.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.08.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.12.2021 passed by the court below. Case Crime No. 412 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 05.03.2022 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60A, 60 U.P. Excise Act registered Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 10.02.2022 by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had moved his bail application bearing number 141 of 2023 before the Special Judge (Gangster) Additional Session judge, Ayodhya and same has been rejected on 31.01.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 128 of 2022 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District– Ayodhya, during pendency of trial, in the interest of justice. |
I, Nagendra Singh aged about 48 years son Shri Surendra Bahadur Singh resident of Shitalamau, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Post Graduate, Occupation – Private Job, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 322 of 2021 under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh on 12.04.2021 at 08.33 hours. The first information report has lodged by Shri Ravindra Nath Rai, Station House Officer, Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh. It is further relevant to mention that the aforesaid first information report is related to the incident dated 11.04.2021 and lodged against the applicant. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 12.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant lodged the first information report after several hours of the incident without giving any explanation with regard to delay cause in lodging first information report. That the informant stated in his first information report dated 12.04.2021 that on 11.04.2021 the informant alongwith his team on patrolling of the area. At that moment an informer has given information that a person is selling the smack, who is working for the applicant. That the informant has raided the alleged place where he found a person who was selling the smack and he informed that he is working for the applicant, who paid the commission on sale of each packet of smack. That on spotting of the another accused, the informant has raided at the house of the applicant, where the informant has found narcotic and psychotropic substance i.e. smack around 365 grams at applicant’s house. That it is relevant to mention here that the contents of the first information report is beyond the truth as well as imagination. The story of the informant is not collaborated with the fact and circumstances of the alleged case crime. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance and the concerned police arrested anther from incident place but without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing his good work. That there is no concerned with recovered Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance in any manner with the applicant as he was involved in such type act and the police concerned falsely implicated in said case crime on statement of the arrested accused namely Gauri Shankar Verma. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any independent eye witness of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the informant stated in his first information report that the Circle Officer, City has been informed for compliance of the Section 50 Section of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, while Circle Officer was not present at time of arrest of the applicant, which is duly cleared from the perusal of the recovery memo, which is the part and parcel of the first information report. There is no signature of the Circle Officer, City on the recovery memo, which is not supported the version of the prosecution. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concerned any type of the act as mentioned in the first information report. The informant for the purpose of getting the reward from the state government, falsely implicate the applicant in said case through the co-accused. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 12.04.2021. That the applicant has no concerned with the recovered smack as alleged by the informant and also the statement of the co-accused totally baseless and same is not reliable in manner. That the informant has no any independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because of the applicant has not committed any offence. The informant concocted the story and stated the wife of the applicant was present at time of raid and she denied to sign the recovery memo. That the concerned police having no sufficient information and evidence against the applicant, even after knowing the first information report, the applicant surrendered before concerned police, in which the applicant was falsely implicated by the informant. That till date the concerned police has not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicant to prove involvement of the applicant is case crime. That till date there is no forensic report (chemical report) of the recovered substance has been received by the informant to established their story that the applicant is involve in business of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That it is very strange that the informant has not named another accused Gauri Shankar Verma in the first information report, even he has lodged the separate first information report bearing Case Crime No. 323 of 2021 under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, while as per the informant, the crime of the applicant and another accused are related to one incident. That the informant for the extraneous reasons lodged separate the first information report against another accused to giving benefit and resulting of same, another accused has been released on bail by the court below. That despite false implication of the applicant in said case crime, some other cases have been lodged against the applicant. Except present case crime, which are as under,:- Case Crime No. 627 of 2014 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by Court below on ……….. Case Crime No. 485 of 2015 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on ……………. Case Crime No. 485 of 2015 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on 22.08.2015. Case Crime No. 461 of 2014 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on 12.08.2014. Case Crime No. 593 of 2017 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on 04.10.2017. Case Crime No. 214 of 2017 under Sections 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on 18.04.2017. Case Crime No. NIL of 2015 under Sections 41, 411 of I.P.C. related to Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by court below on 22.08.2015. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by the court concerned are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in jail since 12.04.2021 without committing any offense. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing number 1171 of 2021 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh on insufficient grounds vide order dated 10.06.2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 10.06.2021 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in relation to case crime No. 322 of 2021 under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case. |
I, Amarjeet Singh aged about 66 years son of Narayan Singh resident of Village – Amarkot, Police Station – Talwandi Chaudhariyan, District – Kapoorthala, Punjab, Religion – Sikh, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of the applicant No. 1 and duly authorized by another application for doing pairvi on his behalf in the above noted case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the application as well as this affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the same. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 523 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420 of IPC and 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 13.08.2021 at 22.19 hours. The first information report has lodged by Shri Ranjeet Singh Bhadauriya, Inspector, Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) and the applicants and another. The certified/ type copy of the first information report dated 13.08.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report dated 13.08.2021 that on 13.08.2021 the informant alongwith his team on patrolling of the area. At that moment an informer has given information that a truck coming from Pratapgarh, in which hudge amount of ganja is loaded between the paint. That when the informant and his team stopped the suspected truck then the applicants has jumped from truck and runaway and also open fire upon the informant and his team. The informant has arrested the applicants along with huge amount of ganja, which is one quintal one Kg and 600 grams. That the here it is relevant to mention that the recovery cum arresting memo prepared by informant and a copy has been given to the applicant No. 1, on which there are no signature of the team of the informant. That it is relevant to mention here that the contents of the first information report is beyond the truth as well as imagination. The story of the informant is not collaborated with the fact and circumstances of the alleged case crime. That the applicants are common man of society and have no concerned with the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance and the concerned police arrested but without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing his good work. That there is no concerned with recovered Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance in any manner with the applicants as they have not involved in such type act. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any independent eye witness of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicants. That the informant stated in his first information report that the Circle Officer, Lalganj has been informed for compliance of the Section 50 Section of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, while Circle Officer was not present at time of arrest of the applicants, which is duly cleared from the perusal of the recovery memo, which is the part and parcel of the first information report. There is no signature of the Circle Officer, Lalganj on the recovery memo, which is not supported the version of the prosecution. That the informant has lodged four first information reports at one, related to the one incident, which is clear violation of the judgments and orders passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Hon'ble High Court. There is no reason for lodging four first information reports for one incident, it has been done by the informant only for reason that he may show his hard work and also for crating the criminal history of the applicants in concerned Police Station. The cases lodged against the applicants from one incidents are as under: That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concerned any type of the act as mentioned in the first information report. When the applicants were carrying the Asian paints from Vishakhapatnam to Ludhiana. The photocopy of the invoice of the Asian paints and transportation papers are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That when the applicants have ready to leave at that moment a person namely Dharmendra Pandit came to the applicants and offered to load the some items, which are food grains to his truck and drop the same in Ludhiana. That the applicants for the extra fare loaded the packets given Dharmendra Pandit and they were unaware that the Dharmendra has loaded the ganja in the truck. That when the truck was stopped by the concerned police, the applicants have fully cooperated the police and they neither runaway nor open fire upon the informant and his team as stated by the informant. That the applicants were assured that Dharmendra loaded food grains but at time of raid the applicants came to know that the same was ganja. That the applicants have not committed the offense, they were carrying the alleged ganja in bonafide manner on presumption of food grain. That the informant has offered to the applicants, if they pay one lack and leave the ganja then they have been released by them but the applicants have no money then they have been arrested and also the informant leveled false allegation of firing upon him and his team. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicants have not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 13.08.2021. That the applicants have no concerned with the recovered ganja as alleged by the informant and also the statement of the co-accused totally baseless and same is not reliable in manner. That the informant has no any independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because of the applicants have not committed any offence. The informant concocted the story and stated that the applicants have confessed their guilty during the recovery of the alleged ganja. That the informant has not complied the provisions of the Section 50 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as the Circle Officer is not a Gazette Officer, according to the Section 42 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as such entire raid conducted is null and void. That there is no special or general order has been passed by the Central or State government to empowered the Circle Officer of the police department to entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorization. That till date the concerned police has not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicants to prove involvement of the applicant is case crime. That till date there is no forensic report (chemical report) of the recovered substance has been received by the informant to established their story that the applicants are involve in business of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicants are guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 420 of IPC and 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is made out against the applicants. That till date the informant has not produced the copy of the first information report of Case Crime No. 322 of 2021 registered under Section 307 of IPC which create doubts upon the act of the informant. The photocopy of the questioner dated 08.09.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the at time of arresting the copy of the arresting cum recovery memo has been given to the applicant No. 1, on which there were no signatures of the team of the informant. Later on the signatures have been put on the said memo in back dated. The photo/ typed copy of the both recovery cum arresting memo dated 13.08.2021 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicants have moved the bail application in case crime No. 522 of 2021, 524 of 2021 and 525 of 2021 lodged against the applicants, in which the court below granted the bail vide its order dated 15.09.2021 and 08.10.2021. The photocopies of the orders dated 15.09.2021 and 08.10.2021 passed by the court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That since the applicants have not committed any offence as alleged but they have been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That the applicants had applied for bail application bearing number 2076 of 2021 but the same has been rejected by the Special Judge (N.D.P.S.)/ Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Pratapgarh on insufficient grounds vide order dated 21.09.2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 21.09.2021 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That there is no chance of applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are in jail since 14.08.2021 without committing any offense. That the applicants have no criminal history except present case crime. That the applicants will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in relation to case crime No. 523 of 2021 under Sections 420 of IPC and 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case. |
I, Ankit Pandey aged about 22 years son of Shri Sunil Kumar resident of Village – Bandhi, Chhiton, District – Chitrakoot, Education – Literate, Occupation – Private Job, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the son/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against unknown persons on 06.07.2024 at 14.29 hours by Chhotelal Gautam son of Shri Shivbalak Gautam resident of Village - Gayaspur, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 191 of 2024 under Sections 309(6) of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 06.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 06.07.2024, it has been stated by the informant that on 06.07.2024 around 02.15 hours, when the informant was sleeping, some persons entered his house and stole Rs. 3,000/- from the informant’s pant, a mobile phone and also bringing the bags of rice and wheat. On the alarm of the informant, the unknown persons beat the son, daughter, and wife of the informant and also fired. The informant further stated that three males and one female committed the case crime. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 07.07.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version with additional facts stating that one accused fired to the leg of his daughter namely Sunita. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 07.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the concerned police arrested two persons on 11.07.2024 namely Shubham Dubey and Chandika. The concerned also recovered Rs. 9,000/- and 315 bore Tamancha from them and also lodged a first information report bearing Case Crime No. 198 of 2024 under Sections 109 of B.N.S., 2023 and 3/25 of Arms Act, 1959 on 11.07.2024. The photocopy of the first information report dated 11.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That during the questioning of the arrested accused, no one named the applicant regarding the commission of the alleged case crime. That on 11.07.2024, the police informer of the Investigating Office revealed the name of the applicant to the Investigating Officer first time. That on 18.07.2024, the applicant was arrested by the concerned police, when the applicant was in the office of the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh for moving an application regarding inaction of the concerned police relating to Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 under Section 307 of IPC at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh and also recovered Rs. 3,000/- from the possession of the applicant. The photocopy of the arresting memo dated 18.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer on the basis of the alleged mobile No. 7052245053, which is not the applicant’s mobile number, came to the conclusion that the applicant committed the case crime. That on the very same day i.e. 18.07.2024, the confessional statement of the applicant was recorded by the Investigating Officer, which was written by him as per his wish to falsely implicate the applicant in said case crime for extraneous reasons. That the story of the police and informant do not collaborate with each other as the informant said only Rs. 3,000/- was stolen on 06.07.2024 whereas in the statement of the applicant, it was stated by the Investigation Officer that the applicant found Rs. 5,000/- as his share after commission of alleged incident. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the real story is that the applicant lodged a first information report against two persons bearing Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 under Section 376-D of IPC at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That when nothing was done by the concerned police of the Police Station – Kunda thereafter the applicant filed a Writ Petition No. 5161 (CRLP) of 2022 (Smt. Neelam Pandey Versus State of U.P. and others) for arresting accused persons and for fair investigation of the case crime. That in said case crime the concerned police without proper investigation, submitted the final report No. 46 of 2022 in favour of the accused persons of the Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 on 11.06.2022, which was challenged by the applicant and the final report dated 11.06.2022 was set aside by the learned court below vide its order dated 11.07.2023 and the concerned police directed to further investigate the matter. The photocopy of the order dated 11.07.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That later on, under the pressure, influence along with money power of the accused persons, the concerned police again, without further investigation of the matter submitted his report on 19.09.2023 by which said that the final report dated 11.06.2022 had affirmed, which was set aside by the learned court below on 11.07.2023. That the applicant was doing pairvi against the accused persons of Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 as such they have enmity with the applicant and threatened her to face consequences of the same. That on 08.03.2024, when the applicant was going to the temple at that time one accused of Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 along with two others stopped her and one accused opened fire, which shot in her left hand. On call to 112, the police came and the applicant was brought to C.H.C., Kunda thereafter referred to the S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj. That later on, a First Information Report was registered on 09.03.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 under Section 307 of IPC at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh against the accused persons. That it is further relevant to mention here that the Investigating Officer has not started the investigation of Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 and not doing anything in the matter against the accused person and the Investigating Officer advised the applicant to keep silent in the matter otherwise the accused person may kill her as well. That when nothing was done by the Investigating Officer of Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 then the applicant filed another Writ Petition No. 4697 (CRLP) of 2024 (Smt. Neelam Pandey Versus State of U.P. and others) for arresting the accused of the Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 as well as fair investigation of said case. That this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated _______ directed to file an affidavit in said writ petition thereafter the concerned police annoyed and with the collaboration of the accused of Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 & 44 of 2024, in a well-planned manner falsely implicates the applicant in present case and she was named in the Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 along with another person Arvind Mishra under the influence of the accused persons of Case Crime No. 117 of 2022 & 44 of 2024 and for extraneous reasons offered by them. That the aforesaid writ petition is pending before this Hon'ble High Court for consideration and for building pressure upon the applicant, she has named in a case crime and also she was made accused in her own case by the concerned police. That due to malafide intention, the Investigating Officer named the applicant knowing everything about the incident i.e. the applicant not commit any offense as alleged against her. That the applicant is not concerned with the alleged incident in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and the allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to her to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offence under Sections 310(2), 311, 317(3) of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has been falsely implicated in another case bearing Case Crime No. 44 of 2024 under Section 307 of IPC at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which was herself lodged. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2205 of 2024 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ F.T.C. - 1, Pratapgarh, and her bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 04.09.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 04.09.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the applicant is in jail since 19.07.2024 without committing any offense. That apart of the abovementioned case, the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 191 of 2024 under Sections 310(2), 311, 317(3) of B.N.S., 2023 relating to the Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of his trial, in the interest of justice. |
I, Virendra Kumar aged about 26 years son of Ram Pratap, resident of Village – Asthan, Abdul Wahidganj, Police Station – Nawabaganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Lobour, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the son/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the 25 named persons including the applicant and 500-600 unknown persons on 23.06.2012 at 20.20 hours by the informant namely Fayyaj Ahmad son of Jaleel Ahmad resident of Village - Asthan, Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 88 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 436, 382, 295, 506, 435, 395 of IPC and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh regarding beating, fireborn, looting only on basis of wrong, false and presumption. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 23.06.2012 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 23.06.2012, he stated that on 23.06.2012 he was at home, he heard hubbub outside, when he came out then saw that several villagers have armed with lathi danda and other sharped weapons and they have looted all house and put on fire each and every house of the area and also giving life threat to the informant and his family members. That here it is relevant to mention that as per allegation of the informant has not said what the reason of said incident. That it is pertinent to mention that the applicant was not the part of the said mob as alleged by the informant, he named the all persons of the nearby his house or who have well known by him and area. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing done by the applicant as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 26.06.2012 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and tried to implicate the applicant in said case crime, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 26.06.2012 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the informant also stated the mob carrying the petoral can but further stated that the mob sprayed the petrol, diesel and kerocein oil on the houses and put on fire and also given some other named on basis of the hearsay evidences. That on 26.06.2012, the several statement of other persons have been recorded they also given similar statements to the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and it is very strange that almost all witnesses stated same story, as someone narrated to all of them. That the confessional statements of the several accused of the case crime have recorded by the investigating officer on various dates under the pressure of the then rulling party and under life threat, in which the accused given ditto similar statements as narrated by the concerned police. That it is also unbelievable at time of alleged incident the informant and others were only looking the mob and not participated in the communal riots. That thereafter without proper investigation and without considering the fact and reality of the case, the investigating officer of the case crime under pressure filed 4 charge sheets bearing No. 33, 33A, 33B and 33C on 07.08.2012, 29.11.2012, 15.12.2012 and 12.01.2013 respectively. The applicant charge sheeted in charge sheet No. 33C dated 12.01.2013. That the real story is that on 20.06.2012 a rape has been committed by the four local resident of the muslim community with a 11 years Hindu girl and after commission of the rape with said girl, they have brutally murdered the girl. That the concerned police was not lodging the first information report regarding the murder and rape of minor girl but after lot of effort a first information report lodged on 21.06.2012 bearing Case Crime No. 87 of 2012 under Sections 376, 302 of IPC at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 21.06.2012 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That during investigation of case crime No. 87 of 2012, the Section 376(2) F & G of IPC and 3(2)5 of SC & ST Act added by the investigating officer and charge sheet was filed against the three accused under 376(2) F & G, 302, 34 of IPC and 3(2)5 of SC & ST Act. That here it is relevant to mention that the accused of the case crime No. 87 of 2012 have been convicted for life impresionment and fine vide order dated 01.10.2016 passed by the Additional Sesseion Judge, Court No. 1, Pratapgarh. Against said conviction order, the two criminal appeal has been filed and is pending before this Hon'ble High Court. That after lodging of the first information report, the several persons i.e. relatives of the accused moking the Hindu comminting and they were saying that they are in power and they have to committed such offense with other girls due to which there was full chance of communal riots. That later on 23.06.2012, the Hindu comminuty heared tha the after feduping of the other community persons as they following the informant of the Case Crime No. 87 of 2012 to murder him then the several persons have gathered moved to the residential area of the other community, where they both community fight with each other. That thereafter under the political pressure the case crime in question has been lodged against the 500-600 unknown persons and 25 known persons including the applicant. That the aforesaid incident became a political tool for the all state and national political parties hence under the pressure of the then rulling party, only one community i.e. Hindu targeted for accusing while in the communal riots both community were involved. That the applicant has no concerned with the incident took place on 23.06.2012 in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That the informant only basis of the presumption that all villagers are involve in incident named the applicant without seeing him. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 435, 382, 436, 395, 295, 323, 506 of IPC and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant was not awared about the said first information report and no summon or warrant severed ever upon the applicant but he has arrested on 12.05.2022 in furtherance of Non Bailable Warrant issued by the trial court by the concerned police. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1423 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 31.05.2022. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 31.05.2022 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 12.05.2022 without committing any offense. That the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in relation to Case Crime No. 88 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 435, 382, 436, 395, 295, 323, 506 of IPC and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act relating to the Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of his trial. |
I, Kr. Laxmi aged about 18 years daughter of Shri Rajjanlal resident of Village – Kushlikheda hamlet of Khairhani, Police Station – Bachhrawan, District – Raiberelly, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Student, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the daughter of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photo verification slip is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this . No any other bail application pending before this or rejected by this . That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged by the applicant herself against three named and 4 unnamed persons on 10.02.2021 on 00.10 hours under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C. mentioning the incident took place on 09.02.2021. The photocopy of the first information report dated 10.02.2021 lodged by the applicant is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the applicant stated in her first information report that the accused of the first information report have kidnapped her son namely Shivansh aged about 14 years, when he was irrigating the field. The said incident took place on 09.02.2021 around 03.30 PM. That after moving the application for lodging the first information on 09.02.2021, the applicant was stayed at concerned Police Station as stated by the police personnel of the concerned police. That later on, night of the 10.02.2021 around 00.10 AM first information lodged by the concerned police. That the applicant was in Police Station – Bachhrawan as the concerned police were assuring the applicant they will informed with regard to development of the case. That meanwhile the son of the applicant was recovered by the concerned police from the custody of the accused persons of the case crime but due to extraneous reasons, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime by the concerned police and accused of the case crime on false allegations. That the concerned police for showing their good work, while they were working for the accused persons, prepare a false recovery memo on 10.02.2021 stating therein that the applicant herself hide her son in a room for falsely implicate the accused of the case crime. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 10.02.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That statement of the son of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. dated 10.02.2021 in which he stated that his mother locked him. The typed copy of the statement of the Shivansh dated 10.02.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the concerned police also recorded the statement of the accused of the case crime namely Vijay Kumar under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 10.02.2021 in which he stated that the applicant lodged false first information report against him and others. The typed copy of the statement of Vijay Kumar dated 10.02.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the father-in-law of the applicant namely Ahorideen, who was the alleged eyewitness of the recovery memo. The typed copy of the statement of the Ahorideen dated 10.02.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that husband of the applicant is residing in State of Kerala and the applicant is residing with her three children in Village – Kushlikheda hamlet of Khairhani, Police Station – Bachhrawan, District – Raiberelly. That the applicant has three children, 1. Laxmi aged about 18 years, 2. Shivansh aged about 14 years and 3. Priyansh aged about 8 years. The applicant is poor lady and having responsibility of her children. That the applicant has dispute relating to the property with her father-in-law. And whenever the applicant demanded share of her husband in the property then her father & brother-in-laws of the applicant have beaten and threaten for life to the applicant. That the applicant lodged a first information report against her father & brother-in-laws on 15.07.2020 bearing Case Crime No. 400 of 2020 under Section 323, 504, 506, 325 of IPC at Police Station – Bachhrawan, District – Raiberelly regarding beaten and life threat. The photocopy of the first information report dated 15.07.2020 lodged by the applicant is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the concerned police has not taken any action against the father & brother-in-laws of the applicant due to which again they all have beaten and threaten to the applicant on 18.07.2020. That again the applicant lodged a first information report against her father-in-law and son-in-law on 18.07.2020 bearing Case Crime No. 402 of 2020 under Section 323, 506, 427 of IPC at Police Station – Bachhrawan, District – Raiberelly regarding beaten and life threat. The photocopy of the first information report dated 18.07.2020 lodged by the applicant is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That it is further relevant to mention that the son of the accused Vijay Kumar namely Ravi owned a bike repairing shop in front of the applicant’s house and he was regularly visited the house of the applicant. That Ravi always helping the applicant in several agricultural works, this is not acceptable by father of Ravi i.e. Vijay Kumar. That due to aforesaid reason, the accused Vijay alongwith others kidnapped the son of the applicant on 09.02.2021 therefore the applicant lodged the first information report against accused persons. That the accused having good political approach and also having muscle and money power due to which the concerned police for the extraneous reasons trapped the applicant in her first information report with the help of the brother & father-in-law of the applicant, who become eyewitnesses of the alleged recovery memo. That the applicant was stayed in the Police Station – Bachhrawan till recovery and false accusation, which would be clear by CDR of the applicant’s mobile No. 9936494278 and her son Shivansh’s mobile No. 9044072138. The CDR of the applicant clearly reveals that she had not hide her son in a room as alleged against her. That the applicant has been moved a bail application before the court concerned bearing Bail Application No. 397 of 2021, which has been rejected by the court concerned without considering grounds raised by the applicant on 03.03.2021. The free copy of the order dated 03.03.2021 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 12.02.2021 without committing any offense. That investigating officer has not found any evidence against the other accused on the basis of statements of the witnesses. That there is no any evidence found by the investigating officer in regard of false accusation but she has been falsely implicated by the concerned police for extraneous reasons. That the applicant is innocent and due to take revenge with informant falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. That there is no any evidence against the applicant to connect her with the aforesaid case crime and the only evidence against the applicant in regard of alleged offence is only false story and baseless recovery and statement of the father-in-law of the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but she has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That a false story cooked up by the concerned police and informant as the applicant committing the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case. |
I, Karunesh Prasad aged about 49 years son of Shri Ganesh Prasad resident of Village & Post – Bhadari, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Post Graduate, Occupation – Teacher, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip of the deponent issued by the Awadh Bar Association, Lucknow is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 01.04.2021 at 05.32 hours against the applicant, another known and several other unknown persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant and his team on patrolling of area on 31.03.2021 and that time the informant got information in regard of huge adulterated liquor is being prepared by the applicant and other persons and they are selling the same. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 31.03.2021 at alleged place of the applicant and seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor but due to political vendetta, the applicant named by the concerned police due to extraneous reasons. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant in aforesaid case crime, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 17.06.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant and his family members were not supporting to a candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach, who has money & men power. That the applicant was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support alongwith his family but the applicant has denied for the same. That therefore the applicant has threatened by the village Pradhan candidate to face consequences for his denial and said that he will ensured that the applicant send to jail soon. That the wife of the applicant is elected as member kshetra panchayat due to which, the several villager are not happy with the applicant as the applicant is belonging the S.C. category. That on 01.04.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That it further relevant to mention that the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned. While the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 17.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the sample of the alleged adulterated liquor for chemical report had sent on 13.04.2021 as mentioned in the CD No. 35 dated 30.07.2021, while there is no entry made in the CD dated 13.04.2021 mentioning that the samples have been send for forensic test. However, till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That as per recovery report, the concerned police recovered a container of adulterated liquor, which has not been sent for the forensic test by the investigating officer due to ulterior motive. The photocopy of the letter dated 11.04.2021, which has been sent for forensic test to concerned lab on 13.04.2021 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant is Safaikarmi and was discharging his duties in Village Panchayat – Shahpur, Block – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That it is further relevant to mention that under construction house, where the adulterated liquor recovered, is neither owned by the applicant nor having any connection with said house. That the investigating officer allegedly recorded the confessional statement of the applicant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which he stated that the petitioner owned the house, where the concerned police recovered the adulterated liquor. The applicant knew that Sudhakar Singh and Guddu Singh is doing business of adulterated liquor due to which the applicant given the said under construction house to them for using it as storage. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of another accused Guddu Singh alias Sanjay Pratap Singh surrendered before the court concerned and his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police. In which he never said that the applicant gave his under construction house for purpose of storage of the adulterated liquor. The typed copy of the statement of the another accused of the case crime is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and other on 09.08.2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910. That as nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant as such the Section 60 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 not attract so far concerned to the applicant. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1672 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 02.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That another accused Rahul Singh and Kamlesh Singh of aforesaid case crime have been granted bail by the learned court below on 26.05.2021 and 28.05.2021 respectively in similar sections. The photocopy of the order dated 26.05.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Jai Prakash Pushapar aged about 48 years son of Shri Chiraunhi Lal resident of Village – Gayaspur, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Gardner, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother-in-law (sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.04.2021 at 23.52 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant lodged a first information report against the applicant and several other persons on 03.04.2021 about 23.52 hours and stated that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 02.04.2021 and that time the team of Surveillance Cell, Prayagraj Zone met with the informant and informed that his team got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told the all 19 names of the accused and stated that from Parsipur Cowshed they are involved in the smuggling the adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 around 16.40 hours at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and he was not present there and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 14 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021. That the impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021 is lodged after one day delayed i.e. on 03.04.2021 by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant were not present at the place of incident. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant in aforesaid case crime, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 24.06.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant and his family members were not supporting to a candidate of the Village Pradhan, who has good political approach, who has money & men power. That the applicant was threatened by the village pradhan candidate to give his support alongwith his family but the applicant has denied for the same. That therefore the applicant has threatened by the village Pradhan candidate to face consequences of the denial and said that he will ensured that the applicant send to jail soon. That on 03.04.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That it further relevant to mention that the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, while the Excise Inspector was present at time of alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 24.06.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not followed him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1552 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and when Section 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 17.08.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That another accused Anoop Singh of aforesaid case crime has been granted bail by the learned court below on 14.07.2021 in similar sections. The photocopy of the order dated 14.07.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant has a criminal history except this false case and detail of the said case is as under: Case No. RC-2 (S) 2013/C.B.I./SC-1/New Delhi under Section 302, 147, 148, 149, 323, 332, 353, 506 and 201 of IPC read with 149 of IPC and 27 Arms Act, in which nothing has been found against applicant and he has been exonerated from the charges. The photocopy of the supplementary charge sheet filed by CBI is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Raj Kumar Prajapati aged about 38 years son of Shri Ram Bahadur resident of Ilayatganj Gadi Manikpur, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Class 8th passed, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is relative of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the first information report lodged in case crime No. NIL of 2014 under section 395/397/328 I.P.C. Police Station – Salon, District – Raiberelly on 19.06.2014 at 09:30 hours. Thereafter aforesaid registered same day at 20:15 bearing G.D. No. 38 case Crime No. NIL of 2014 converted as case crime No. 396 of 2014 under section 395/397/328 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Salon, District – Raiberelly. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 396 of 2014 under section 395/397/328 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Salon, District – Raiberelly on 19.06.2014 for the incident dated 17.06.2014. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 19.06.2014 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the first information report is lodged by the one namely Arun Yadav who was the driver of the truck. According the First Information Report the prosecution story is, the driver Arun Yadav and helper Sonu Yadav was moved from East India Transport Agency, Vardhana to Lucknow with the 432 bori Supari weighted 28,500 KGs which was loaded in the truck MP 28-H-1070 on 14.06.2014. In midnight of 17.06.2014 on Raiberelly Road 6-7 persons are come with together with vehicle Boloro and stopped the truck forcefully and give the intoxicating substance to drink, thereafter they become unconscious and when they came in conscious they are at Risalpur, Near Manikpur road and half of loaded Supari, which is in truck, was looted by the aforesaid persons. That the applicant was not named in the first information report. His name comes in light in the statement of the helper namely Sonu Yadav of the aforesaid truck, being drive of the recovered vehicle. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigation officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 19.06.2014. The typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 with this application. That the statement of the Sonu, the helper of the aforesaid truck has been recorded by the investigation officer on 19.06.2014 under section 161 Cr.P.C.. That thereafter on 20.06.2014 the Majeed Bayan of helper of the aforesaid truck has been recorded by the investigation officer therein the helper revealed the detailed story of the case and the name of the applicant name has came in light by the majeed bayan of the helper, only as driver of the recovered Innova. The typed copy of the statement of the helper of the aforesaid truck is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 with this application. That the applicant arrested from his house with his motor cycle. Motor cycle of the applicant is ceased by the Police Station – Salon as Lawaris and arresting of the applicant shown from the recovered vehicle Innova for showing the good work of the concerned Police Station. That according to the recovery memo nothing was recovered from the applicant by the police. It is relevant to mention here that the applicant was driver of the recovered vehicle Innova, no any other concerned with the applicant and the applicant not drive the said recovered vehicle Innova at the time of arresting the other accused. That it is also relevant to mention here that nothing was recovered by the police on the pointing out of the applicant. That according the statement of the helper of the aforesaid truck, the applicant has no any roll assigning and involvement in aforesaid crime. The only two names reveals in involvement of the crime 1. Raju and 2. Anil. That the recovered vehicle bearing registration No. MH -06 – AF - 1586 is vehicle Innova and same is evident from the registration certificate of the same. But in the first information report the vehicle is mentioned as Boloro. The photocopy of the registration certificate of the vehicle is being annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That the applicant is only driver of the recovered vehicle. There is no any other concerned with the same and being a drive of the said vehicle as per direction of the owner of the vehicle, he was driving the vehicle. That the being driver of the recovered vehicle Innova, the applicant falsely implicated in the said crime. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the applicant nor innovation in the conspiracy of the case crime. That a contradiction in the statement of the helper and informant’s statement, according the helper he seeing the incident took on place in midnight of 18/19.06.2014 but the in the first information report the incident dated mention as midnight of 17.06.2014. That the investigation officer recovered the vehicle Innova only showing the good work of the police department. That the recovery of the vehicle Innova with the applicant, is highly suspicious and contradictory because of the applicant is only driver of the aforesaid vehicle Innova. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is respectable person of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this . That the applicant is in Jail since ……………………. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Raiberelly but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 23.07.2014. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 23.07.2014 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Shivsharan Yadav aged about 22 years son of Shri Amarpal Yadav, resident of Village – Raipur Maheva, Police Station – Salon, District – Raiberelly, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Business, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 02 of 2021 under Sections 272, 419, 420 of IPC and 60, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Unchahar, District – Raiberelly on 01.01.2021 at 04.40 hours against the applicant. The first information report is lodged by Sub Inspector, Unchahar, District – Raiberelly namely Shri Ramdas Verma. The certified copy of the first information report dated 01.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report the prosecution story is, in nutshell, that the informant and his team (other police personnel) were on patrolling of the area in the night of 31.12.2020 at that time the informant got information from his informer regarding of huge adulterated liquor is being transporting in area by the Mahindra Pick-up. Thereafter the informant and his team stopped the vehicle then the applicant was driving and he was arrested by them informant and his team with adulterated liquor. That it is further relevant to mention here that on bare perusal of the first information report it is clear that the informant himself stated that on scanning of the bar code of the alleged adulterated liquor, it was not confirmed that the liquor is adulterated but the informant arrested the applicant. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the checking the applicant was not there, the concerned police arrested the applicant from Batohi Restaurant, Unchahar, District – Raiberelly without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing good work of the police. That the real fact is that the applicant is falsely implicated in the case crime for ulterior motive by the concerned police. That the applicant is respected person of the area and common man of the society and running a Building Material Shop in local market i.e. Raipur Maheva. That the applicant has no concerned with vehicle seized by the concerned police and recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as he was arrested from Batohi Restaurant, Unchahar, District – Raiberelly, where he was present with his friends for celebration of New Year, 2021 but the police concerned falsely implicated in said case crime. That the Tanki test of alleged adulterated liquor has not been conducted by the Excise Officer concerned and even prior to information regarding said liquor, the informant has not informed to the excise officer concerned, even the informant was himself not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated but he has arrested the applicant from Batohi Restaurant, Unchahar, District – Raiberelly and falsely implicated in said case crime. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of raid conducted by the informant even he has not endorsed any averment with said regard, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant/accused in jail since 01.01.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there are no any independent eye witnesses of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant/accused has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 272, 419, 420 of IPC and 60, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Unchahar, District – Raiberelly have not followed him. That the informant arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery but not found anything from the applicant except the liquor seized by him and vehicle. That it is not possible that the applicant was driving the seized vehicle from State of Madhya Pradesh but he was not carrying the any relevant papers, i.e. driving license, vehicle papers, money and etc. as such story of the informant is false and incorrect and so far from the reality. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Raiberelly but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 12.01.2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 12.01.2021 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 02 of 2021 under Sections 272, 419, 420 of IPC and 60, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Unchahar, District – Raiberelly during pendency of trial. |
I, Shriram aged about 66 years son of Shri Ramdeen Verma resident of Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification issued by the Awadh Bar Association, of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the application as well as this affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the same. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 08 of 2021 under Sections 304, 120B, 328, 272, 201 of I.P.C., 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh on 23.01.2021 at 23.52 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 23.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Kaushalpati Yadav, Sub Instpector, Police Station - Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant went to brick field on 21.01.2021 situated at Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kahndaur, District – Pratapgarh for preparation of a inquest, then he came to know that apart from the deceased, another person has also died due to drinking of adulterated liquor on 21.01.2021 and his crimination has been done at Prayagraj. The informant, from initial investigation, he found that the applicant and other persons have involved in the supply and distribution of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 4 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 23.01.2021. That the impugned first information report dated 23.01.2021 is lodged after two days delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay, which is also creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor in any manner. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant is milkman and running the business and earned sufficient movable and immovable properties due to which some villagers having enmity with the applicant. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant was supplying the milk to the brick field situated at Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kahndaur, District – Pratapgarh since long back. The informant said the applicant to record his statement against the owner of the brick field then the applicant denied for same as the applicant has no concerned with the owner of the brick field except milk supply to him. That the informant annoyed with the applicant and abused him and walk away from the applicant’s house but under the influence of the some villagers, the informant named the applicant in first information report dated 23.01.2021. That on 23.01.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration; the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That about after three months, the investigating officer, recorded the statements of the family members of the deceased, under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 17.04.2021 almost similar statements and revealed the name of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the deceased’s relative are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That just after two days of the statements of the deceased’s family members i.e. 20.04.2021, their further statements have been recorded by the investigating officer, in which they have repeated their statements. The typed copy of the further statements of the deceased’s family members are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That on 03.05.2021, the statements of the family members of the deceased persons, which have been given through affidavits, in they all have stated that the deceased neither consumed the liquor nor died due to adulterated liquor. The photocopy of the endorsement in the affidavit in the CD-28 dated 03.05.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of case crime, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 02.08.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That the informant alleged in his first information report that the adulterated liquor has been supplied by the applicant and another person and also the deceased have been died due to drink of adulterated liquor. That nothing has been recovered from the applicant’s possession by the informant and if any recovery made, the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 272 of IPC and 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 made against him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1801 of 2021, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going into the fact and records of case. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 14.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That another accused Raju Singh Kithawar of aforesaid case crime has been granted bail by the learned court below. That another accused of the case crime namely Sanjay Sharma moved bail before this Hon'ble High Court, which has been granted by this Hon'ble High Court on 04.08.2021. The photocopy of the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That due to false implication of the applicant in the case crime, his business has been ruined and his family is came on road. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. There is no criminal history against the applicant except this present case. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 08 of 2021 under Sections 272 of IPC and 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of trial. |
I, Shriram aged about 66 years son of Shri Ramdeen Verma resident of Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification issued by the Awadh Bar Association, of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the application as well as this affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the same. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 08 of 2021 under Sections 304, 120B, 328, 272, 201 of I.P.C., 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh on 23.01.2021 at 23.52 hours against the applicant and several other accused persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 23.01.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Kaushalpati Yadav, Sub Inspector, Police Station - Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant went to brick field on 21.01.2021 situated at Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kahndaur, District – Pratapgarh for preparation of a inquest, then he came to know that apart from the deceased, another person has also died due to drinking of adulterated liquor on 21.01.2021 and his crimination has been done at Prayagraj. The informant, from initial investigation, he found that the applicant and other persons have involved in the supply and distribution of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 4 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 23.01.2021. That the impugned first information report dated 23.01.2021 is lodged after two days delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay, which is also creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor in any manner. That the real fact is that the applicant are falsely implicated in the case crime due to political reasons by the some villagers, which has been explained by the concerned police for the ulterior motive. That the applicant is milkman and running the business and earned sufficient movable and immovable properties due to which some villagers having enmity with the applicant. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant was supplying the milk to the brick field situated at Village – Chandrabhanpur, Police Station – Kahndaur, District – Pratapgarh since long back. The informant said the applicant to record his statement against the owner of the brick field then the applicant denied for same as the applicant has no concerned with the owner of the brick field except milk supply to him. That the informant annoyed with the applicant and abused him and walk away from the applicant’s house but under the influence of the some villagers, the informant named the applicant in first information report dated 23.01.2021. That on 23.01.2021, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due extraneous consideration; the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the statement of the sister of the deceased Lail has been recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer on 23.01.2021, in which she stated that the owner and munshi of the brick field have served the liquor. She not mentioned the name of the applicant in any manner. The photocopy of the statement of the sister of the deceased Lail being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That about after three months, the investigating officer, recorded the statement of the family member of the deceased Rohit, under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 17.04.2021, in which wife of the deceased also given similar statement and revealed the name of the applicant after about three months of the incident. The typed copy of the statement of the wife of the deceased Rohit is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That just after two days of the statements of the deceased Lail’s sister on 20.04.2021, the further statement has been recorded by the investigating officer, in which she repeated her earlier statement but named the applicant. The typed copy of the further statement of the deceased Lail’s sister is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That on 03.05.2021, the statements of the family members of the deceased persons, which have been given through affidavits, in they all have stated that the deceased neither consumed the liquor nor died due to adulterated liquor. The photocopy of the endorsement of the affidavit in the CD-28 dated 03.05.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That so far allegation made by the informant that the deceased Lail died due to consumption of the adulterated liquor, it is relevant to mention the post mortem was conducted but nothing has been shown in post mortem report that the deceased died due consumption of the adulterated liquor. The photo/typed copy of the post mortem report of the deceased Lail is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the brick field owner and his nephew have been recorded by the concerned police, who have also named in the first information report on 25.05.2021, in which both have given all details, against them the other witnesses stated that they were distributed the adulterated liquor, have not named the applicant themselves. The typed copy of the statement of the brick field owner and his nephew are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police on 02.08.2021 and taken on remand under Sections 272 of IPC and 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of case crime, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 02.08.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That the informant alleged in his first information report that the adulterated liquor has been supplied by the applicant and another person and also the deceased have been died due to drink of adulterated liquor. That nothing has been recovered from the applicant’s possession by the informant and if any recovery made, the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 272 of IPC and 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 made against him. That another accused Raju Singh Kithawar of aforesaid case crime has been granted bail by the learned court below on 30.04.2021. That another accused of the case crime namely Sanjay Sharma moved bail before this Hon'ble High Court, which has been granted by this Hon'ble High Court on 04.08.2021. The photocopy of the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1801 of 2021, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going into the fact and records of case. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 14.09.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That till date there is no any chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant has no criminal history except this false case, lodged by the informant for extraneous reasons. That due to false implication of the applicant in the case crime, his business has been ruined and his family is came on road. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. There is no criminal history against the applicant except this present case. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 08 of 2021 under Sections 272 of IPC and 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Kohndaur, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 60A of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya on 01.04.2021 at 10.16 hours against the one person namely Rajnath Verma. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report as he has committed any offence as alleged against the concerned police later on during the investigation by the investigating officer. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Motilal Verma, resident of Village – Trilokpur, Daffarpur, Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that son of the informant consumed the adulterated liquor between 30.03.2021 to 01.04.2021 and become ill. He was treated in Gossainganj, later on he referred to Lucknow but during travelling to Lucknow, the son of the informant died. That the informant lodged the first information report against the accused Rajnath Verma. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he given detail of the incident and stated that due to political enmity, the named accused given a party on 29.03.2021, in which he served and distributed adulterated liquor and after consumption of same, the son of the informant died on 01.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police, in which the informant changed his statement and reveal new names of other accused. That during the investigating officer recorded the several statements of the witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. namely Ram Tirath, Pullu Kahar, Hriday Kumar Tiwari, Sanay Tiwari, Rakesh Verma, Bachcha Ram, Deepak Verma, Raju Verma and Mohd. Vaish but no anyone named the applicant in said case crime. That till submission of the CD No. 72, dated 02.09.2021 prepared by the investigating officer, the name of the applicant is not came in light. The photocopy of the CD-72 dated 02.09.2021 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the investigating officer, during course of investigating officer went to the Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.09.2021 and met with the Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, who told the name of the applicant and stated that one accused Guddu Singh and the applicant alongwith other accused were operating the factory of adulterated liquor and several first information reports have been lodged against the said accused. The photo/typed copy of the CD-73 dated 03.09.2021 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That later the on basis of the statement of Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, the investigating officer, named the applicant in case crime only on presumption basis in illegal manner. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor as alleged by investigating officer due to extraneous reasons. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow and due to false implication in said case crime, the career of the children gone in dark. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on basis of the statement of the Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station – Hathigawan, Police Station – Pratapgarh, whereas the applicant has no concerned with the illegal business as alleged by the investigating officer. That there is no concerned with the allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged/concocted by the investigating officer under the political pressure. The investigating officer working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the investigating officer falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is named in the case crime about five months due to extraneous reasons, while there no any concrete evidences against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail in connection with case crime No. 124 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, while the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh,. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which has been lodged by the concerned police, when the applicant is in jail. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which almost all accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Faizabad bearing Bail Application No. 1856 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 02.12.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 34 of I.P.C., 60, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 05.04.2021 at 02.09 hours against the applicant and 12 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 05.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Sub Inspector Shri Pramod Kumar Singh, Inchare SWAT Team, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) stated therein that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 03.04.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) with regard to huge adulterated liquor stored. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 03.04.2021 at alleged place of the applicant and seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis which the applicant is named in the case crime. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 02 in the accused column in the first information report dated 05.04.2021. That the first report dated 05.04.2021 is anti dated as the raid was conducted on 03.04.2021 but the first information report lodged on 05.04.2021 by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant was not present at the place of incident. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow and due to false implication in said case crime, the career of the children gone in dark. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession on 03.04.2021. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against 12 accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet No. 228 of 2021 on 11.09.2021 without receiving the Forensic Science Lab report. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That under the political influence, after alleged raid on 03.04.2021, two first information reports lodged i.e. 124 of 2021 and Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh by the SHO, Kunda against the applicant and other named and unknown persons, for preparing the criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 06.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which has been lodged by the concerned police, when the applicant is in jail, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below and this Hon'ble High Court alongwith other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the maximum accused of the case crime No. 124 of 2021 have been granted bail by the court below on various dates. The photocopy of the bail order passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, the co-accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which the accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh has been granted bail to him on 24.11.2021. The photocopy of the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2816 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 07.12.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 05.04.2021 at 20.43 hours against the applicant and 12 other named and unknown persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 05.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Devendra Pratap Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station - Kunda, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) stated therein that the informant and his team on patrolling of area on 05.04.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor stored in shop situated between Babuganj Highway and railway line. That the raid has been conducted by the informant alongwith his team on 05.04.2021 at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at the time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to raid and on basis which the applicant is named in the case crime. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 02 in the accused column in the first information report dated 05.04.2021. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant was not present at the place of incident and even he has no concerned with said alleged recovery. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow and due to false implication in said case crime, the career of the children gone in dark. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession on 05.04.2021. That the concerned police without proper investigation and under the pressure of the local politician against 12 accused persons including the applicant, filed the charge sheet on 11.09.2021 without receiving the Forensic Science Lab report. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That under the political influence, after alleged raid on 05.04.2021, two first information reports lodged i.e. 125 of 2021 and Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh by the SHO, Kunda against the applicant and other named and unknown persons, for preparing the criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 06.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which has been lodged by the concerned police, when the applicant is in jail, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below and this Hon'ble High Court alongwith other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the maximum named accused of the case crime No. 125 of 2021 alongwith other accused, whose name came in light during the investigation, have been granted bail by the court below. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the several co-accused of the case crime has been approached to this Hon'ble High Court for anticipatory bail, which has been granted by this Hon'ble High Court to the co-accused of the case crime. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2801 of 2021 in Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 07.12.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under,:- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 14.10.2021 at 12.45 hours against the applicant and 5 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 14.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Ram Adhar Singh Yadav, Sub Inspector, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The prosecution story is in nutshell that on 13.10.2021 the informant and his team was on patrolling of area and that time he got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told that behind the varsiya chicken shop situated at nearby Purnemau crossing, Hathigawan road, huge adulterated liquor has been stored. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 13.10.2021 at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor, which was buried and arrested one accused by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the arrested accused namely Riyaz Ahmad and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 02 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 14.10.2021. That the alleged raid/recovery made by the informant on 13.10.2021 and first information report dated 14.10.2021 is lodged after one day delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021. That due to political reasons, the name of the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case crime on 14.10.2021, even when he is jail since 08.09.2021. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow. The photocopies of the fee receipts of the applicant’s children are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner as he is jail since 08.09.2021. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 14.10.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh,. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the co-accused of the case crime namely Riyaz Ahmad and Bachcha Yadav have been granted bail by the court below vide its order dated 09.11.2021. The photocopy of the order dated 09.11.2021 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2752 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 30.11.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 01.04.2021 at 05.32 hours against the two known and several unknown persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 01.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant and his team on patrolling of area on 31.03.2021 and that time the informant got information from his informer with regard of huge adulterated liquor is being prepared by the applicant and other persons and they are selling the same. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 31.03.2021 at 22.10 hours at alleged recovery place and seized lot of adulterated liquor. That the co-accused of the case crime i.e. Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh has surrendered before the court concerned on 04.06.2021 in aforesaid case crime and according to the case diary, the investigating officer after getting the permission from the court concerned, recorded the statement of the co-accused under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in jail on 07.06.2021, in which he said that the applicant is involve in said case crime alongwith him. The type copy of the statement of the co-accused of the case crime Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh recorded on 07.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That later on the investigating officer recorded another statement of the co-accused of the case crime namely Rajesh Saroj on 25.06.2021, in which he also stated that the applicant was involve in business of the adulterated liquor. The type copy of the statement of the co-accused Rajesh Saroj of the case crime recorded on 25.06.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That for the extraneous reasons, the applicant falsely implicated in said case crime for showing good work of the police and after more than 5 months the chemical report is received by the investigating officer of the case crime. On basis of the chemical report it has been found the alleged recovered liquor is not adulterated hence the Section 272 & 273 of IPC has been dropped by the investigating officer, which is mentioned in CD No. 39 dated 16.09.2021. The typed copy of the CD No. 39 dated 16.09.2021 of the case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. - 4 to this affidavit. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant was not present at the place of incident and even he has no concerned with said alleged recovery. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow and due to false implication in said case crime, the career of the children gone in dark. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession on 05.04.2021. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 06.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which has been lodged by the concerned police, when the applicant is in jail, in which the applicant has been granted bail on 07.12.2021 by this Hon'ble High Court. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order passed by the court below and this Hon'ble High Court alongwith other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, the co-accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which the accused Sanjay Pratap Singh alias Guddu Singh and Rajesh Saroj have been granted bail to him by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopy of the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 0000 of 2021 in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 00.00.0000 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C. and 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of trial. |
I, Durga Bux Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Satya Dev Singh resident of 3/344, Vishwash Khand – 3, Police Station - Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Occupation – Business, Education – Graduate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 03.04.2021 at 02.09 hours against the applicant and 12 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Doodhnath Singh Yadav, Station House Officer, Police Station - Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the informant lodged a first information report against the applicant and several other persons on 03.04.2021 about 23.52 hours and stated that the informant and his team was on patrolling of area on 02.04.2021 and that time the team of Surveillance Cell, Prayagraj Zone met with the informant and informed that his team got information from his informant (eq[kfcj), who told the all 19 names of the accused and stated that from Parsipur Cowshed they are involved in the smuggling the adulterated liquor and stored huge adulterated liquor. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 02.04.2021 around 16.40 hours at alleged place of occurrence and seized lot of adulterated liquor and no anyone arrested by the concerned police at time raid. That the name of the applicant was told by the informer (eq[kfcj) of the concerned police prior to the raid and he was not present there and on basis of which the applicant is named in the first information report. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column impugned first information report dated 03.04.2021. That the alleged raid/recovery made by the informant on 02.04.2021 and first information report dated 03.04.2021 is lodged after one day delayed by the concerned police without giving any reason for delay. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant was not present at the place of incident. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has good reputation being national player of volleyball. That the applicant was serving to the Central Government and was posted as Point-man, at Northern Railways, District – Sultanpur. The photo/type copy of the certificate issued by the railway authority on 15.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the applicant had shifted to Lucknow along with his family since long back and he rarely visits his village. That the children of the applicant are studying in class VIII & III City Montessori School, Indira Nagar, Lucknow and due to false implication in said case crime, the career of the children gone in dark. That the applicant was National Player of Volleyball and won several awards and lastly he was participated in 31st National Games, Punjab – 2001, in which he secured Silver Medal. The photocopies of the certificates related to the volleyball are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the entire case has been made and based against the applicant only on information of the police informer, which is not reliable as nothing is supported to prosecution story. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant. The informant working for the present local Member of the Parliament of the ruling party due to political vendetta, he has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner. That on bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no independent witnesses of raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That the applicant was in jail in connection with case crime No. 124 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That the investigating officer of case crime No. 50 of 2021 has moved an application before the court concerned to take the applicant in police custody remand on 21.09.2021. The police custody remand application has been allowed by the court concerned on 23.09.2021 and the applicant sent to police custody remand from 25.09.2021 at 08.00 AM to 08.00 PM in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021. That after taking in police custody remand, a false and fabricated recovery memo has been prepared by the concerned police. In which on pointing out of the applicant, the concerned police recovered huge amount of adulterated liquor and other related items on 25.09.2021. That the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2021 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh have not applicable against him. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at alleged place of recovery even not found anything from the applicant’ possession on 02.04.2021. That till date there is no any chemical report received from the alleged recovery dated 25.09.2021 stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station - Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 15.11.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court. Case Crime No. 49 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh,. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 124 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 125 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60A, 60 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 107 of 2021 under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 60 of U.P. Excise Act registered at Police Station – Gossainganj, District – Ayodhya, in which the name of the applicant came in the light from the accused person. Case Crime No. 121 of 2021 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 208 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 486, 487, 272 of I.P.C., 60, 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, which has been lodged by the concerned police, when the applicant is in jail. That the aforesaid 8 cases are recently lodged against the applicant under the political pressure. Case Crime No. 15 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the investigation is going on. Case Crime No. 517 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at Police Station – Mil Area, District – Raebareli, in which the applicant released on bail. Case Crime No. 17 of 2016 under Section 135 The Electricity Act registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has paid the bill but the concerned police in malafide manner submitted the charge sheet against the applicant. Case Crime No. 178 of 2014 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273, 427 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 3/4 of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the charge sheet has been submitted by concerned police and the applicant is exonerated from the said case crime as he was falsely implicated in case. Case Crime No. 513 of 2010 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 364, 395, 427 of I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant is released on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopies of the bail order and other related documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there no criminal history against the applicant. That the several accused of the case crime have been filed bail before the learned court below in which one Anoop Singh, who have criminal history of 30 cases, granted bail by the court below on 14.07.2021. That after rejection of the bail from the learned court below, several accused also have been filed the bail application before this Hon'ble High Court in which 10 accused have been granted bail to them on various dates. The photocopies of the orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 2822 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 30.11.2021 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Mohd. Faheem Ahmad aged about 20 years son of Ali Ahmad resident of Village - Khampur, Patti, Police Station – Dilippur, District – Pratapgarh, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Self-employed, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the brother/pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of the applicant in the above-noted case and duly authorized by him for filing the instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That the instant bail application is being filed during the summer vacation as urgent as the applicant is in jail since 06.04.2024 without committing any offense. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before this Hon'ble High Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 42 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506, 323, 286, 427 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Dilippur, District – Pratapgarh on 05.04.2024 at 23.48 hours against the applicant/accused and 9 other named along with 6 unknown persons. The first information report is lodged by Nizam Ali son of Late Sher Ali resident of Village - Khampur, Police Station - Dilippur, District - Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified/type copy of the first information report dated 05.04.2024 lodged by the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, the prosecution's story is in a nutshell, that the informant was present in a Roza Iftar at his house along with other persons at that time due to old enmity, the applicant along with other accused reached to his house along with lathi, danda and stated to kill the informant and they assaulted upon the some persons, who sustained the injuries. That the applicant is a common man of society and has no concern with the alleged allegation without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime. That the general allegations have been made by the informant and no any specific role assigned to the applicant or other. That the informant lodged the said first information report in the counterblast to save himself and his companions as one accused of the case crime namely Ishrat Ali lodged a first information report on 04.04.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 41 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 at Police Station - Dilippur, District - Pratapgarh. The photocopy of the first information report lodged on 04.04.2024 against the informant and his companions is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the injured were brought to the District Hospital on 05.04.2024 for treatment, where the injury reports were prepared, in which nothing was found serious. The photo/ typed copies of the medical of the injured are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 06.04.2024 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he almost repeated his version of the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 06.04.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the two accused of the case crime were arrested by the concerned police on 06.04.2024 including the applicant and on pointing of them the concerned police recovered two lathi, which were allegedly used by the arrested accused at the time of the alleged incident. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 06.04.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That on 15.04.2024, the statements of the injured persons were recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they almost repeated the first information report in their own words and tried to falsely implicate the applicant in the case crime. The typed copies of the statements of the injured persons dated 15.04.2024 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concerns about any type of the act as mentioned in the first information report. The informant falsely implicates the applicant in said case. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 05.04.2024. That another accused of the case crime namely Ishrat Ali contested the Village Pradhan election, which was held in 2021, in which the wife of the informant also contested the election. That the wife of the informant lost her election and due to which the informant and his well-wisher had enmity with him. That on 04.04.2024, the informant and his companions had beaten Ishrat Ali as such Ishrat Ali lodged a first information report on 04.04.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 41 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 at Police Station - Dilippur, District - Pratapgarh. That after lodging the first information report against the informant and others, they planned to take revenge from Ishrat Ali and his well-wisher in the result of the same, on 05.04.2024, when Ishrat Ali invited the applicant and others on 05.04.2024 for Roza Iftar at his house then the informant and his companions assaulted upon Ishart Ali and the applicant also. That during the attack of the informant and his companions, the applicant and others for their defense fought with them thereafter when the concerned police reached at the incident place, brought the applicant and Ishrat Ali for medical treatment but for extraneous reasons, lodged the first information report against the applicant and others and they were challaned also. That later on, a forged and fabricated recovery memo was prepared by the concerned police on 06.04.2024 for extraneous reasons and showing that the applicant along with another accused tried to abscond. That the wife of Ishrat Ali moved an application for lodging the First Information Report against the informant and his companions but the same was not lodged by the concerned police as they were extending the protection to the information. That thereafter, the wife of Ishart Ali met with the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh to lodge the first information report, who directed the Station House Officer, Police Station - Dilippur to lodge the first information report on 10.04.2024. That thereafter the first information report was lodged against the informant and his companions on 19.04.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 50 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 352, 427, 504, 506, 286 of I.P.C. at Police Station - Dilippur, District - Pratapgarh regarding incident dated 05.04.2024. The photocopy of the first information report dated 19.04.2024 lodged against the informant and others is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the informant has no any independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because the applicant has not committed any offense. That till date the concerned police have not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicant to prove the involvement of the applicant in the case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima-facie offence under 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506, 323, 286, 427 of I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the according to the first information report, Section 307 of I.P.C. is not made out against the applicant. That on a bare perusal of the recovery-cum-arresting memo, it is clear that on 05.04.2024 at 23.48 hours, the Investigating Officer left the concerned Police Station to arrest the accused of the case crime and also stated that he was the Investigating Officer of the case crime while the first information report itself lodged on 05.04.2024 at 23.48 hours. That the promptness of the Investigation Officer of the case crime itself shows that he was working for the informant for extraneous reasons, as while the first information report was lodging by the concerned police persons at the same time the Investigating Officer left the Police Station to arrest the applicant and other accused of the case crime. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That here it is relevant to mention here that the applicant has no concerns with the alleged incident but the concerned police arrested the applicant and connected him with the said offense for extraneous reasons. That apart from the above as per the best knowledge of the applicant, no other criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before bearing No. 1094 of 2024 the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 27.04.2024. The free copy of the bail rejection order dated 27.04.2024 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and has no concern. That the applicant has been in jail since 06.04.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is the common man of the society. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 42 of 2024 lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506, 323, 286, 427 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Dilippur, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of the trial, in the interest of justice. |
I, Manoj Kumar aged about 38 years son of Late Dharmraj resident of 41, Police Line, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – LL.B., Occupation – Advocate, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is uncle/pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before this Hon'ble High Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 21 of 2023 under Sections 386, 411 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Musafirkhana, District – Amethi on 12.02.2023 at 00.10 hours against three unknown persons regarding an incident dated 10.02.2023. The first information report is lodged by Shiv Charan son of Shri Heeralal resident of Village – Umamishra Purwa hamlet of Umapur, Police Station – Musafirkhana, District – Amethi (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified/ type copy of the first information report dated 12.02.2023 lodged by the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, the prosecution story is in nutshell, that the informant and his two brothers were returning from their work on 10.02.2023. The informant was driving his motorcycle TVS Sport and his brothers were on another bike. Nearby Dadara, a bike overtake the informant and stopped his brothers, on which three persons. A person came to the informant and asked to give his bike, mobile and money otherwise his brothers have been killed by him. The informant was under the threat, hence the informant gave the things to him. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 10.02.2023 but the first information report has been lodged on 12.02.2023 after more than 2 days, without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report, which is already questionable and doubtful as the informant lodged aforesaid first information after legal advice. That the applicant is a common man of society and has no concern with the alleged allegation without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime. That it is relevant to mention here that the contents of the first information report are beyond the truth as well as imagination. The story of the informant does not collaborate with the fact and circumstances of the alleged case crime. That the applicant is a student of class 12th and has no concerns with the allegations as alleged by the informant against the applicant and the concerned police arrested the applicant from his house on the basis of the false criminal case lodged and without any evidence, reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing his good work. The typed copy of the recovery cum arresting memo dated 12.02.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That after the alleged recovery of the motorcycle, the investigating officer added Section 411 of IPC in said case crime on 12.02.2023. That according to the prosecution story, clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence while the applicant was arrested at about 13.25 hours and there is no independent eye-witness of the said recovery and it is a case of the forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That on 12.02.2023, the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which almost repeated his version of the first information report, with slight improvement, as per directions of the concerned police, to falsely implicate the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 12.02.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concerns about any type of the act as mentioned in the first information report. The concerned police for the purpose of getting the reward from the state government, falsely implicated the applicant in said case. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 12.02.2023. That the applicant was allegedly arrested by the concerned police from his house and showed that he has been arrested from another place and also recovered the Pulser bike having registration number UP 72 – BM – 5107, which is registered in the name of the applicant’s father. The photocopy of the registration certificate of the bike is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police have no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because the applicant has not committed any offence. The concerned police concocted the story and stated that the applicant has confessed his guilt at the time of his arrest. That till date the concerned police have not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicant to prove the involvement of the applicant is the case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima-facie offence under 386, 411 of I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police at the time of recovery and arrest was under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That here it is relevant to mention here that applicant has no concerns with the alleged incident but the concerned police arrested the applicant and connected him with the said offense for an extraneous reason. That apart from the instant case, in which this bail application is being filed, another case is lodged against him bearing Case Crime No. 1047 of 2022 under Sections 323, 341, 354, 506 of IPC and 7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh, in which the as per the best knowledge of the applicant, the investigation is going on.:- That apart from the above as per the best knowledge of the applicant, no other criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before bearing No. 628 of 2023 the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 07, Sultanpur but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.02.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 22.02.2023 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and has no concerns. That the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2023 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 21 of 2023 lodged under Sections 386, 411 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Musafirkhana, District – Amethi, in the interest of justice. |
I, Smt. Khurshida Bano aged about 35 years wife of Iqbal Ahmad resident of in front of Civil Court, Subhash Nagar, Kasba - Kunda, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Muslim, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is wife of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 112 of 2020 under Sections 307, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh on 20.04.2020 at 03.27 hours. The first information report is lodged by Shri Pramod Patel, who is allegedly victim of the alleged case crime. It is further relevant to mention that the aforesaid first information report is related to the incident dated 19.04.2020 and lodged against the applicant and another. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 20.04.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant lodged the first information report after one days of the incident without giving any explanation with regard to delay cause in lodging first information report. That the informant stated in his first information report dated 20.04.2020 that on 19.04.2020 around 11.30 PM when he was at home alongwith his family at that moment the accused came at his house and demanded the Ganja from him. The informant denied for it then the applicant demanded the Ganja from the brother of the applicant. Later on the applicant abusing the informant and his brother and attacked with bomb upon the informant and his brother, in which they both were injured. That it is relevant to mention here that the contents of the first information report is beyond the truth as well as imagination. The story of the informant is not collaborated with the fact and circumstances of the alleged case crime. That after the aforesaid alleged incident the informant and his brother was brought to the hospital for initial treatment on next day of incident i.e. 20.04.2020. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the informant and his brother is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That on very same day i.e. on 20.04.2020, the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which the informant almost repeated his averments of the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 20.04.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the concerned police having no sufficient information and evidence against the applicant, even after knowing the first information report, the applicant surrendered before concerned police, in which the applicant was falsely implicated by the informant. That after surrender of the applicant and another accused, the concerned police added the Sections 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 in said case crime. That after surrender of the applicant, the concerned police recorded the statement of the applicant under the threat of the life on 20.04.2020, in which he confessed his guilt. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the concerned police submitted charge sheet bearing number 172 of 2020 against the applicant and another accused persons under Sections 307, 504, 506 of IPC and 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 on 14.07.2020 relating to Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. That till date the concerned police has not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicant to prove involvement of the applicant is case crime. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only fake, fabricated and false story and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 307, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common and peace loving man of the society and surviving anyhow due to Covid-19 alongwith his family. That as per prosecution there is no allegation of throwing the bomb by the applicant, which is duly confirmed by the informant and other witnesses of the case crime. That after false implication of the applicant in said case crime, the concerned police implicate the applicant in several other cases. Except present case crime, which are as under,:- Case Crime No. 817 of 2014 under Sections, 396, 302, 201, 412, 34 of IPC, related to Police Station – Munshiganj, District – Amethi, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopy of the order dated 29.01.2016 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. Case Crime No. 193 of 2014 under Sections, 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, related to Police Station – Kotwali, District – Sultanpur, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble High Court. The photocopy of the order dated 08.03.2016 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. Case Crime No. 175 of 2016 under Section 110G of Cr.P.C.. related to, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. The aforesaid case is not comes under the criminal history category. Case Crime No. 215 of 2016 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gunda Act related to Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 365 of 2019 under Sections Section 33/25 Arms Act, Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has enlarged on bail by the court below. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 20.04.2020 without committing any offense. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing number 183 of 2021 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh on insufficient grounds vide order dated 05.02.2021. The free certified copy of bail rejection order dated 05.02.2021 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in relation to case crime No. 112 of 2020 under Sections 307, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 registered at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case. |
I, Pankaj Kumar Yadav aged about 23 years son of Shri Dadan Babu Yadav resident of Village – Paschim Ka Purwa, Sahjani, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is brother of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case and also duly authorized by him. The deponent further declares that the contents of this instant application explained by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That this is second bail application. First bail application No. 6434 of 2018 has been rejected by Hon’ble Shri Anant Kumar “J” on 11.04.2019. No any other bail application pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the applicant in jail on the basis of first information report lodged by the Informant, Badelal Yadav on 30.07.2017 at 14.30 hours against the five persons including the applicant vide case crime No. 100 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 at Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 30.07.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That according to the prosecution story, it was alleged in the impugned first information report dated 30.07.2017 that the informant solemnized the marriage of his daughter namely Manju (hereinafter referred as to ‘deceased’) with the applicant with lot of dowry. But the all accused of the case crime demanded Rs. 2 Lacs from the daughter of the informant and for same they were tortured her. On 27.07.2017, the informant visited her daughter’s house then he was informed that the accused of the case crime had set the deceased ablaze. When the informant reached hospital, he found dead body of the deceased in car. That as a matter of fact the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the Informant due to malafide intension of the Informant and on the ill advice of his relative. That as a matter of fact the applicant or his family had never demanded any dowry nor had tortured the deceased for the alleged demand of dowry. That the applicant never demanded any dowry from the deceased or her family members and after this unfortunate incident’s information was given by this applicant to the family members of the deceased as well as Informant and they were present at the time of Panchayatnama. The photo/ typed copy of the panchayatnama is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that as the deceased was brought to the hospital by the family members of the applicant in imergent situation and when the deceased declared dead then the hospital authority informed to the concenred police and police authority came and stated proceeding of the inquest as such the inquest report has not contained the case crime. That the post mortem was conducted on 30.07.2017 about 04.48 PM and as per post mortem report the deceased was burned 95% and smell of kerosene oil was present. The death of deceased caused by shock as a result of ante mortem burn injuries. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of the informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the concerned police on 30.07.2017, in which he almost repeated his first informant report. The type copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the statements of the uncle of the deceased Amrit Lal and her grandfather Chhedi Lal were also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the concerned police, in which they have also supported the version of the first information report. The typed copies of the statements of the Amrit Lal and Chhedi Lal are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That some other statements have been recorded by the concerned police, who are the interested witnesses of the case i.e. the statements of the brother of the deceased Manoj Kumar, mother of deceased Smt. Rajkali, sister of the deceased Madhu Devi, brother-in-law of the deceased Shiv Bhavan Yadav and other relatives were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.. All the interested witnesses and unanimously stated that the marriage of the deceased and application was solemnized on 22.04.2015 and levelled general allegations of demand of dowry and stated that the applicants and his family members murdered the deceased. The typed copies of the statements of the relative of the deceased are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That on 07.09.2017, the investigation of the case crime recorded the statements of the some independent witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they specifically stated that the brother & sister of the applicant namely Sachin & Sonam, who were named in the first information report, were not involved in the alleged incident. The type copies of the statements of the Bahubal and Chandrapal are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That on basis of the statements of the independent witnesses, the name of the brother & sister of the applicant namely Sachin & Sonam were dropped during the investigation and they were exonerated. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer of the case crime, filed the charge sheet against the applicant and his mother & father on 23.10.2017 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photo/typed copy of the charge sheet dated 23.10.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That on perusal of the charge sheet, it is clear that the informant has named the accused persons in alleged case crime, in a very casual manner and without ascertaining the facts. That prior to the date of incident neither deceased nor informant has filed any complaint or police report was never filed either with the police or any other competent authority for any cruelty or demand of dowry, which creates doubts upon the prosecution story. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 15.07.2017 without any of his fault. That no crime made out against the applicant as alleged in the impugned first information report lodged by the Informant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case. That the applicant has no criminal history at all except to this present case. That entire allegations as alleged in the first information report is false and frivolous. There was neither any demand of dowry nor the deceased was harassed in any manner. That real fact of the case is that the relation between the applicant and his family members are very sweet with the deceased. That the deceased could not conceive due to medical reasons, due to which she was not happy. The deceased was under treatment with Dr. Ishar Ahmad at Maniikpur. On 27.07.2017 itself, the ultrasound scan was performed at Allahabad and in the report it revealed that the deceased never conceived even after her treatment. The photocopy of the medical report of the deceased dated 27.07.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the deceased was very upset by knowing the fact that she will never conceived even after her treatment. The deceased was in deep depression since then. The applicant and his family members tried their best to explain the deceased but being hypersensitive with regard to child. That on 30.07.2017, when no anyone at house of the applicant as the family member of the applicant went to paddy field for routine work of caring the crop at that time the deceased committed suicide by setting herself ablaze as she was too dipressed after knowing that she will never become mother even after treatment. That whent the family members of the applicant informed with regard to fire in their house by the villager then then returned to home and found that the deceased burned herself by using kerosene oil. That the applicant was also out of house and immediate incident the family member of the applicant brought the deceased the hospital and due to painic situation they have not informed to the concerned police with regard to said incident. That just after incident occurred, the in-laws of the deceased were informed and deceased brought to the hospital, where she was declared brought dead. Thereafter the informant and other persons were reached to the hospital and lodged the first information against the applicant and other persons on the basis of the incorrect facts. That the first information report has been lodged afterthought and after consultation, in order to falsely implicate the applicant and other accused persons. That the first information report has been lodged in connivance with the police personnel because as per the inquest report, the informant was at CHC during inquest proceeding from 13.45 to 14.45 hours of 30.07.2017, however as per the first information report dated 30.07.2017, it was lodged at 14.30 hours, which is not possible and creates doubt upon the prosecution. That the deceased committed suicide due to her own reasons i.e. after knowing that she will never become mother even after treatment. That the other co-accused of the case crime i.e. mother and father of the applicant have been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 20.12.2017 & 31.05.2018. The case of the applicant is identical and he is languishing in jail on the ground of being husband only. The photocopy of the bail order of this Hon'ble Court on 20.12.2017 & 31.05.2018 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the bail application of the applicant has been rejected by learned Session Judge/F.T.C., Pratapgarh in bail application No. 62 of 2018 vide order dated 09.02.2018. The photocopy of the bail rejection order dated 09.02.2018 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That the applicant has filed first bail application before this Hon'ble Court as Criminal Case No. 6434 (B) of 2018 has been rejected by Hon’ble Shri Anant Kumar “J” on 11.04.2019. The photocopy of the order dated 11.04.2019 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this affidavit. That the trial of the case has been initiated and statements and cross of the informant and other witnesses have recorded by the court concerned in which they all are stand with their statements under Sections 161 of Cr.P.C., with malafide intension to prove guilty the applicant. The photocopies of the statement and cross of the witnesses of the trial are being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That on bare perusal of the aforesaid statements of the witnesses of the ongoing trail, there are several contradiction in the all statements, which are not collobrated with the prosecution story. That all are the interested witnesses as such merely on basis of their statements and testimony, the applicant would not be pleaded guilty. That the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons, which has been discussed hereinabove but the informant and his family members falsely implecated the applicant and his family in said case with malafide intension. That state of the Doctor has also examined on 02.07.2019 by the court concerned in which he stated that there was no external and enternal injury found on the body of the deceased. The doctor further state that the soot particle found in the trachea of the deceased, which shows it is clear that the deceased burned herself and she was freely breating at time of burn. The photo/typed copy examination of the doctor conducted the post mortem of the deceased is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 14 to this affidavit. That the during the argument of the first bail application, the government advocate opposed the bail by satying that the incident had taken place in inside of the house of the applicant and he had not informed to the police, so far this averment of the government counsel it is relevant to mention that when the deceased put her on ablaze then the applicant and his family brought the deceased to hospital in said imergent situation, the first priority was there the treatment of the deceased not the information given to the concerned police. That merely on basis of the said averment of the government counsel this Hon'ble High Court rejected the first bail application of the applicant while he is entitled to enlarge on bail in view of the aforesaid averments made in this affidavit. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the Informant. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish personal bond and sureties to the entire satisfaction before the court, if the bail is granted to him. That in view of the above noted fact, it is clear that the applicant is innocent and his is in jail since 15.07.2017 as such it is expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial. |
I, Budhai aged about 60 years son of Janjali resident of Pure Shiva Vaishy (Purwa), Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicant No. 2 and Pairokar of the applicants and doing pairvi of applicants in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicants before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicants have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 282 of 2013 under section 302/201 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 03.09. 2013. The F.I.R. is lodged by the father of deceased namely Brijlal Verma and the occurrence date is 02.09.2013. A true photo/type copy of the F.I.R. dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, accused/applicant is labor and other two accused person namely Prakash Saroj and Ram Bahadur are the contractor of wood and doing work of cutting the tree. They are call to son of informant namely Ram Prakash for laborer at morning 8.00 A.M. of 02.09.2013. When the son of informant was not came to home till 9.30 P.M. of night then informant enquired about his son then came to known that the all above are at the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. When informant go to said place, there was only accused are present with the stick and murmuring together, after seeing the informant they keep quit and told to the informant his son go to his home but deceased not come to home. The informant was searching his son but on 03.09.2013 the informant got information of the dead body of his son, which was found nearby the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. That after registration of F.I.R. the police of police station Lalganj, went on the place of occurrence and recovered the dead body of the deceased and prepared the inquest report on 03.09.2013. According to the inquest report the cause of death report due to injury caused on his head. That the statement of informant was recorded by the investigation officer at the place of occurrence on 03.09.2013 under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of informant supports F.I.R. version. A type copy of the statement of informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Ramdhani Verma was also recorded by the investigation officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and he is supports the prosecution story. A type copy of the statement of eyewitness is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased has also been done on 03.09.2013 and according to the post mortem report the cause of death is shock as a result of antimortem head injury. A type copy of the post mortem report dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is arrested by the police on 04.09.2013 after one day of arrest, the applicant sent to jail. That as a matter of fact nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicants and whatever recovery of the Lathi has been shown on his pointing out on 04.09.2013 by the investigation officer is totally false and planted one, which is itself evident from the perusal of the material available on record. A copy of the recovery memo is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicants in court concerned. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the any accused. That the no any motive is disclosed by the informant for the murder of his son. That according to the statement of eyewitness and informant the deceased was beaten by the all accused persons but in the post mortem report the cause of death shown only head injury. That a contradiction in the statement of the eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the all incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at night and when the eyewitness informed to the informant about the last night incident then why informant is mum on the part of eyewitness in his F.I.R.. That the eyewitness is stated in his statement two times the name of deceased Om Prakash while the deceased name is Ram Prakash. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement while the deceased has no any other name i.e. alias. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicants/accused. Those applicants have not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no motive assigned against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicants conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are respectable persons of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are in Jail since 05.09.2013. That the applicants will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicants had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.11.2013. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 22.11.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Budhai aged about 60 years son of Janjali resident of Pure Shiva Vaishy (Purwa), Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 282 of 2013 under section 302/201 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 03.09.2013. The F.I.R. is lodged by the father of deceased namely Brijlal Verma and the occurrence date is 02.09.2013. A true photo/type copy of the F.I.R. dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, accused/applicant is labor and other two accused person namely Prakash Saroj and Ram Bahadur are the contractor of wood and doing work of cutting the tree. They are call to son of informant namely Ram Prakash for laborer at morning 8.00 A.M. of 02.09.2013. When the son of informant was not came to home till 9.30 P.M. of night then informant enquired about his son then came to known that the all above are at the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. When informant go to said place, there was only accused are present with the stick and murmuring together, after seeing the informant they keep quit and told to the informant his son go to his home but deceased not come to home. The informant was searching his son but on 03.09.2013 the informant got information of the dead body of his son, which was found nearby the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. That after registration of F.I.R. the police of police station - Lalganj went on the place of occurrence and recovered the dead body of the deceased and prepared the inquest report on 03.09.2013. According to the inquest report the cause of death report due to injury caused on his head. That the statement of informant was recorded by the investigation officer at the place of occurrence on 03.09.2013 under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of informant supports F.I.R. version. A type copy of the statement of informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Ramdhani Verma was also recorded by the investigation officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and he is supports the prosecution story. A type copy of the statement of eyewitness is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased has also been done on 03.09.2013 and according to the post mortem report the cause of death is shock as a result of antimortem head injury. A type copy of the post mortem report dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is arrested by the police on 04.09.2013 after one day of arrest, the applicant sent to jail. That as a matter of fact nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicant and whatever recovery of the Lathi has been shown on his pointing out on 04.09.2013 by the investigation officer is totally false and planted one, which is itself evident from the perusal of the material available on record. A copy of the recovery memo is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant in court concerned. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the accused. That the no any motive is disclosed by the informant for the murder of his son. That according to the statement of eyewitness and informant the deceased was beaten by the all accused persons but in the post mortem report the cause of death shown only head injury. That a contradiction in the statement of the eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the all incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at night and when the eyewitness informed to the informant about the last night incident then why informant is mum on the part of eyewitness in his F.I.R.. That the eyewitness is stated in his statement two times the name of deceased Om Prakash while the deceased name is Ram Prakash. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement while the deceased has no any other name i.e. alias. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That the applicant is very poor and any how maintaining his family but due to false implication, his family is on verge of starvation. That there is no motive assigned against the applicant. That the applicant is a respectable person of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 05.09.2013. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.11.2013. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 22.11.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Pankaj Prajapati aged about 45 years son of Sheetal resident of Village –Jasmedha, P.S. – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Caste – Lohar, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the son of accused-applicant and Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That according to the prosecution story as narrated in the first information report dated 11.7.2009, at about 6:30 P.M., the applicant, deceased Kamlesh and their mother had gone to the nearby market and while returning back, the accused persons namely Kamlesh son of Mitthu Kumar, Sheetal son of Kallu Kumar and second son of Indra Bahadur Singh stopped the deceased and in the meantime, all accused opened fire arm on the deceased Kamlesh causing injury to him. After the incident the accused persons flew away on the motorcycle. The deceased died on the spot. True copy of the first information report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That as a matter of fact. the applicant is innocent and has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report. That the incident is said to have taken place at about 6:30 P.M. on 11.7.2009 and the first information report was registered on the same day at about 20:30 P.M.. That the inquest report has been prepared on 11.7.2009 at about 21:10 P.M. in which five persons were witnesses of the inquest report. That the inquest of the deceased was drawn on 11.7.2009 in which complainant, Uma Shankar Shukla have been shown as inquest witnesses and as per the information of the witness the death was caused by fire arm injury. In the inquest nobody has been named as accused. True copy of the inquest report dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That it is relevant to mention here that the first information report is totally ante-timed and ante-dated and the assailants were not know to the complainant. The first information report was lodged on 11.7.2009 at about 8:30 P.M. but the fact is absolutely incorrect because from record (radiogram) which was supplied by the prosecution, it is clear that the first information report is ante-timed and the assailants were not known to the informant at the time of the incident. In this regard the copy of the Radiogram dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That according to the Radiogram which was received at 20.48 hours (8.48 P.M.), it is mentioned that three persons have fired upon the deceased. In the same Radiogram, which was received at 20.55 hours (8.55 P.M.), it mentioned that “Jisko Goli Mari Gai Uski Mrittyu Ho Gai Hai.” Whereas, in the first information report which was lodged at 20.30 hours (8.30 P.M.) under section 302 IPC. That it is relevant to point here that no first information report was lodged before 23.25 hours (11.25 P.M.), because the Radiogram, which was received 23.25 hours, the names of the assailants have been mentioned, meaning thereby that the first information report is totally ante-timed. The names of the accused persons and the first information report were lodged afterthought. That it is relevant to point out here that the deceased Kamlesh was interstate hardened criminal due to that reason he was having enmity with many person and due to that enmity and his criminal activities he was murdered in the night by some unknown persons in the unknown circumstances and no one has seen the actual incident and due to enmity and village party-bandi the applicant was roped in the false care of prosecution. That the criminal history of the deceased Kamlesh is as under Case Crime No. 71 of 2002, under section 302/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; and (c) informant Uma Shankar; Case Crime No. 46 of 2002, under section 307 IPC, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; Case Crime No. 47 of 2002, under section 25 Arms Act, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli; Case Crime No. 327 of 2006, under section 452/323/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh Except above, there are many others cases upon the deceased which are unknown to the deponent at this time. That the postmortem of the deceased Kamlesh was conducted on 12.7.2009 at 2.20 P.M. in the District Hospital, Pratapgarh. True copy of the postmortem report dated 12.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the complainant Uma Shankar Shukla stated in his evidence before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh that who has caused the respective injury to the deceased are not known to him and he has also stated that the deceased was not having any enmity with the applicant/accused. The copy of the statement of Uma Shankar Shukla is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the mother of deceased recorded her statement before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh as P.W. – 2. The P.W. – 2 stated in her statement the deceased was not went to market with me. The copy of the statement of P.W. - 02 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the motive of the incident also not goes to the applicant. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself shows that no offence under section 302 IPC and section 25/27 Arms Act is made out against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and he is willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 18.7.2009. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is innocent and he has no criminal history. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 16.12.2009. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 16.12.2009 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Pankaj Prajapati aged about 45 years son of Sheetal resident of Village –Jasmedha, P.S. – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Caste – Lohar, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the son of accused-applicant and Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That according to the prosecution story as narrated in the first information report dated 11.7.2009, at about 6:30 P.M., the applicant, deceased Kamlesh and their mother had gone to the nearby market and while returning back, the accused persons namely Kamlesh son of Mitthu Kumar, Sheetal son of Kallu Kumar and second son of Indra Bahadur Singh stopped the deceased and in the meantime, all accused opened fire arm on the deceased Kamlesh causing injury to him. After the incident the accused persons flew away on the motorcycle. The deceased died on the spot. True copy of the first information report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That as a matter of fact. the applicant is innocent and has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report. That the incident is said to have taken place at about 6:30 P.M. on 11.7.2009 and the first information report was registered on the same day at about 20:30 P.M.. That the inquest report has been prepared on 11.7.2009 at about 21:10 P.M. in which five persons were witnesses of the inquest report. That the inquest of the deceased was drawn on 11.7.2009 in which complainant, Uma Shankar Shukla have been shown as inquest witnesses and as per the information of the witness the death was caused by fire arm injury. In the inquest nobody has been named as accused. True copy of the inquest report dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That it is relevant to mention here that the first information report is totally ante-timed and ante-dated and the assailants were not know to the complainant. The first information report was lodged on 11.7.2009 at about 8:30 P.M. but the fact is absolutely incorrect because from record (radiogram) which was supplied by the prosecution, it is clear that the first information report is ante-timed and the assailants were not known to the informant at the time of the incident. In this regard the copy of the Radiogram dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That according to the Radiogram which was received at 20.48 hours (8.48 P.M.), it is mentioned that three persons have fired upon the deceased. In the same Radiogram, which was received at 20.55 hours (8.55 P.M.), it mentioned that “Jisko Goli Mari Gai Uski Mrittyu Ho Gai Hai.” Whereas, in the first information report which was lodged at 20.30 hours (8.30 P.M.) under section 302 IPC. That it is relevant to point here that no first information report was lodged before 23.25 hours (11.25 P.M.), because the Radiogram, which was received 23.25 hours, the names of the assailants have been mentioned, meaning thereby that the first information report is totally ante-timed. The names of the accused persons and the first information report were lodged afterthought. That it is relevant to point out here that the deceased Kamlesh was interstate hardened criminal due to that reason he was having enmity with many person and due to that enmity and his criminal activities he was murdered in the night by some unknown persons in the unknown circumstances and no one has seen the actual incident and due to enmity and village party-bandi the applicant was roped in the false care of prosecution. That the criminal history of the deceased Kamlesh is as under Case Crime No. 71 of 2002, under section 302/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; and (c) informant Uma Shankar; Case Crime No. 46 of 2002, under section 307 IPC, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; Case Crime No. 47 of 2002, under section 25 Arms Act, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli; Case Crime No. 327 of 2006, under section 452/323/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh Except above, there are many others cases upon the deceased which are unknown to the deponent at this time. That the postmortem of the deceased Kamlesh was conducted on 12.7.2009 at 2.20 P.M. in the District Hospital, Pratapgarh. True copy of the postmortem report dated 12.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the complainant Uma Shankar Shukla stated in his evidence before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh that who has caused the respective injury to the deceased are not known to him and he has also stated that the deceased was not having any enmity with the applicant/accused. The copy of the statement of Uma Shankar Shukla is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the mother of deceased recorded her statement before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh as P.W. – 2. The P.W. – 2 stated in her statement the deceased was not went to market with me. The copy of the statement of P.W. - 02 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the motive of the incident also not goes to the applicant. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself shows that no offence under section 302 IPC and section 25/27 Arms Act is made out against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and he is willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 18.7.2009. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is innocent and he has no criminal history. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 16.12.2009. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 16.12.2009 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. |
I, Rahul pushpakar aged about 26 years son of Shri Harikesh pushpakar resident of Village - Shringraverpur, Police station – Nawabganj, District – Allahabad, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Gardner, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is son of brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 09.10.2021 at 23.42 hours against the applicant and 3 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 03.10.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 03.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Chandra Bhan Singh, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the applicant is active member of a gang, which was headed by the applicant himself along with some other members. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the single case i.e. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court on 06.12.2021. The photocopy of the order dated passed by this Hon'ble High Court 06.12.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 04 in the accused column first information report dated 09.10.2021 as gang member. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 18.04.2022. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant of the case crime NO. 50 of 2021. The said informant lodged first information report on the basis of information given by the informer. That the applicant has a criminal history except this false case and detail of the said case is as under: Case No. RC-2 (S) 2013/C.B.I./SC-1/New Delhi under Section 302, 147, 148, 149, 323, 332, 353, 506 and 201 of IPC read with 149 of IPC and 27 Arms Act, in which nothing has been found against applicant and he has been exonerated from the charges. The photocopy of the supplementary charge sheet filed by CBI is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner, related to the case crime No. 50 of 2021. That the applicant is in jail since 18.04.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 5, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1057 of 2022 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 02.05.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That the applicant further declares in compliance of the section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangster and Anti–social Activities (Prevention)Act, 1986 that the applicant is committed any offense as alleged in the first information report and also he is not likely to commit any offense while on bail, if so granted by this Hon’ble High Court. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That it is further prayed that the requirement of filing an Affidavit along with the Application(s) may further be dispensed with in view of the Guidelines provided by the order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 09.01.2022. That the deponent further declared that after lifting the lockdown, he will be filed hard copy of the proper affidavit within one month. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Karuna Shankar aged about 50 years son of Shri Kripa Shankar Tiwari resident of House No. F-637, Rajaji Puram, Avas Vikas Colony, Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the uncle/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 136 of 2023 lodged under Sections 498A, 323, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow on 09.07.2023 at 13.07 hours, against the applicant, his mother and his sister. The first information report is lodged by Shri Sarvesh Kumar Sharma son of Late Jograj resident of House No. 548/C747, Chandroday Nagar, Police Station – Para, District – Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter namely Vibha Sharma (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was solemnized on 05.12.2021. The deceased was tortured for the dowry and on 09.07.2023 at 01.24 hours the informant got information regarding the murder of the deceased. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant and his family members to get financial benefit. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his family members on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the informant and other persons on 09.07.2023. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 09.07.2023 at District Hospital, Lucknow wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors, and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about 12 hours back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 09.07.2023 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner and tried to develop his prosecution story to fill the loopholes of the prosecution story to send the applicant behind the bar merely being the husband of the deceased. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the mother and brother of the deceased was also recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 24.07.2023 in which they repeated the version of the informant in their own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant and his family members in said case crime. The photocopies of the statement of the mother & brother of the deceased dated 24.07.2023 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized on 05.12.2021 after getting/viewing information from the matrimonial newspaper. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and his family from the informant and his family as dowry prior to and after the marriage as alleged against the applicant and others. That initially the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased. That the deceased was an ambitious and dominating lady and she wanted to control the applicant & his mother and their decisions as well as she wanted to do the job. That the deceased was not interested in residing with the mother of the applicant due to which she was not used to taking care of her, after the initial days. That without the consent of the applicant, the deceased started her job i.e. teaching in a private school, due to which the dispute started between the deceased and the applicant. That after joining the teaching job, the deceased was not interested in doing the daily work of the house mainly the preparation of the food due to which the applicant was not happy and requested her to leave the job and take care of his family and house. That the applicant was taking care of her old age mother and due to her old age illness, as she herself was not able to prepare the food for her and other daily work, due to which the deceased was also not happy with the applicant. That the deceased was adamant about continuing her job and when the dispute between the deceased and the applicant increased, therefore, the mother of the applicant started living separately on the ground floor and also separated her kitchen. That after the separation from the mother of the applicant, the dispute was not settled between the deceased & the applicant even though the deceased was pressurizing the applicant to leave the house. That on 08.07.2023, the deceased fought with the applicant with regard to the job of the deceased and was not ready to leave at the parental house of the applicant as a result of same, she did not go to school. That due to the aforementioned reason, the deceased was upset and she locked her in the room. When the deceased did not open the door for a long time. The applicant called his mother then they saw that the deceased committed suicide due to her own reasons. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the applicant immediately informed the concerned police and informant after said unfortunate incident. The concerned police came to the house of the applicant and after breaking the door, the body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and his family members after getting legal advice just for his satisfaction while he is well aware that his daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons.. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant is being the husband of the deceased falsely implicated in the said case crime by the informant along with his family while the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons. That the informant due to extraneous reasons named the sister of the applicant in the case, while she is residing with her husband in another District, and during the Investigation Office, she was exonerated from all charges. That the statements of the neighbor of the applicant were recorded by the Investigating Officer as witnesses on 28.07.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they also supported the version of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the neighbor of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That several persons have given their affidavit before the authority concerned stating therein that the applicant is innocent and she is not involved in the commission of the offense as alleged against her. They further stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. The photocopies of the affidavit given by several persons are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer without proper investigation of the case crime submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others under bearing Charge Sheet on 28.08.2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 28.08.2023 submitted in case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima facie offense is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is a common man of society. He has never been involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offense. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in jail being the husband of the deceased since 10.07.2023 without committing any crime. That the mother of the applicant, who is also falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime has moved bail application before this Hon'ble High Court bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 13798 (B) of 2023 (Smt. Aruna Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.), which has been allowed by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 22.11.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 22.11.2023 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing Bail Application No. 8068 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow on insufficient grounds vide order dated 26.10.2023. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 26.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow, during the pendency of the case. |
I, Karuna Shankar aged about 50 years son of Shri Kripa Shankar Tiwari resident of House No. F-637, Rajaji Puram, Avas Vikas Colony, Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the friend (neighbor)/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow on 09.07.2023 at 13.07 hours, against the applicant and 2 other family members. The first information report is lodged by Shri Sarvesh Kumar Sharma son of Late Jograj resident of House No. 548/C747, Chandroday Nagar, Police Station – Para, District – Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter namely Vibha Sharma (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was solemnized and the son of the applicant on 05.12.2021. The deceased was tortured for the dowry and on 09.07.2023 at 01.24 hours the informant got information regarding the murder the deceased. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant and her family members to get financial benefit. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and her family members on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the informant and other persons on 09.07.2023. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 09.07.2023 at District Hospital, Lucknow wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about 12 hours back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 09.07.2023 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner and tried to develop his prosecution story to fill the loopholes of the prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the mother and brother of the deceased was also recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 24.07.2023 in which they repeated the version of the informant in their own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant and his family members in said case crime. The photocopies of the statement of the mother & brother of the deceased dated 24.07.2023 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the son of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized on 05.12.2021 after getting information from the matrimonial newspaper. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and her family from the informant and his family as dowry prior to and after the marriage as alleged against the applicant and others. That the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased. The photographs of the deceased and the applicant showing a good relationship are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the deceased was an ambitious and dominating lady and she wanted to control the son of the applicant and his decisions as well as she wanted to do the job. That the resistance of her husband, the deceased started her job i.e. teaching in a private school, due to which the dispute started between the deceased and her husband. That after joining the teaching job, the deceased was not interested in doing the daily work of the house mainly the preparation of the food due to which the son of the applicant was not happy and requested her to leave the job. That the son of the applicant takes care of the applicant being her old age mother and due to her old age illness, the applicant herself was not able to prepare the food for her. That the deceased was adamant about continuing her job and when the dispute between the deceased and her husband increased, therefore, the applicant started living separately on the ground floor and also separated her kitchen. That the tenant of the applicant was too good, mostly she prepared food for her in the applicant’s kitchen and the applicant had kept her distance from the dispute between the deceased and her husband. That after the separation between the deceased and her son, the dispute was not settled between them even though the deceased was pressurizing her husband to leave the house. That on 08.07.2023, the deceased and her husband fought with regard to the job of the deceased and taking care of the applicant, and as a result of same, she did not go to school. That due to the aforementioned reason, the deceased was upset and she locked her in the room. When the deceased did not open the door for a long time. The son of the applicant called her then they saw that the deceased committed suicide due to her own reasons. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the son of the applicant immediately informed the concerned police and informant after said unfortunate incident. The concerned police came to the house of the applicant and after breaking the door, the body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and her family members after getting legal advice just for his satisfaction while he is well aware that his daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons.. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That the informant due to extraneous reasons named the daughter of the applicant in the case, while she was residing with her husband in another District, and during the Investigation Office, she was exonerated from all charges. That the statements of the neighbor of the applicant were recorded by the Investigating Officer as witnesses on 28.07.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they also supported the version of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the neighbor of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That several persons have given their affidavit before the authority concerned stating therein that the applicant is innocent and she is not involved in the commission of the offense as alleged against her. They further stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. The photocopies of the affidavit given by several persons are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer without proper investigation of the case crime submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others under bearing Charge Sheet on 28.08.2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 28.08.2023 submitted in case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima facie offense is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but she has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is a common man of society. He has never been involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offense. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in jail since 10.07.2023 without committing any crime. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing Bail Application No. 8068 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow on insufficient grounds vide order dated 26.10.2023. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 26.10.2023 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow, during the pendency of the case. |
I, Sunita Singh aged about 33 years wife of Shri Arvind Kumar singh resident of S - 5, Jail Road, P.R.D. Colony Homeguard, Alambagh District – Lucknow, Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the sister /pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh on 09.05.2021 at 22.34 hours against the applicant and one other person. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.05.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 16.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 16.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Tushar Dutt Tyagi, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the Santosh Singh is the gang leader of a gang, and the applicant is the active member of the gang. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the one case i.e. Case Crime No. 172 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 60, 60A, U.P. Excise Act and 63 of Copyright Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 22.09.2019. The photocopy of the bail order dated 22.09.2019 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 02 in the accused column first information report dated 09.05.2021. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant in order to showing his good and hard work, falsely implicate the applicant in some case crimes. That the applicant does not committed any offence for his economical and physical benefit. The applicant is not convicted previously in any case crime. The allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 229 of 2012 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 103, 104 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act and 63 Copyright Act, 60(2)/63 Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which nothing has been found against the applicant as such his name has been dropped from the investigation on 17.09.2020. Case Crime No. 13 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 103, 104 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act and 63 Copyright Act, 60(2)/63 Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant was granted bail on 07.04.2023 the learned court below. Case Crime No. 31 of 2018 under Sections 138-A, Electricity Act, police station –Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has no knowledge about this case. Case Crime No. 60 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 63 Copyright Act, 60/63-A Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, the applicant has no knowledge about this case and till date summon has not been served upon the applicant. Case Crime No. 14 of 2024 under Sections 352, 504, 506 I.P.C at Police Station – Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has no knowledge about this case. Case Crime No. 184 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, Police Station– Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 29.02.2024. The photocopy of the typed copy of the C.D. – 5 and the photocopies of the bail orders passed by the learned court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That apart of abovementioned cases, there are no other criminal history against the applicant. That the co-accused of the case crime i.e. gang leader namely Prince Singh has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 10.06.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Case No. 195 (B) of 2021. The photocopy of the order dated 10.06.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 3, AT Sadar, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1026 of 2024 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 01.05.2024 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is in jail since 04.01.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial. |
I, Rijvan aged about 34 years son of Sher Ali resident of Village - Muraha, Dhema, Police Station - Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur, Education – 5th Class, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 26.05.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 155 of 2024 under Sections 354 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station – Dostpur, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 24.05.2024. The certified copy of the first information report dated 26.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 24.05.2022, the opposite party No. 2 left his daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) at his brother-in-law’s house. On that day, around 08.30 PM when his daughter was returning home from the fair (Mela) at that time, the applicant molested his daughter. That the first information report was lodged around 2 days from the date of the alleged incident without giving any sufficient reason for delay, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which she repeated the version of the first information report and not said the applicant committed rape with her. That the victim had refused to get examined medically after she was produced before the medical officer of the concerned hospital. That the investigating officer added Section 354-D, 376, and 506 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in the aforesaid case crime and dropped Section 354 of I.P.C. and 7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court, in which she stated that she changed her statement and also tried to develop his prosecution story to send the applicant behind bars. That the real story of the case is that the applicant and opposite party No. 2 are residents of the same area. That the applicant was running a shop for around 10 years, where he resided in a rented house. That there was a dispute between the applicant and opposite party No. 2 & his family regarding taking water from the hand pump, which is a public hand pump, for taking water for the applicant and opposite party No. 2. That on 24.05.2024, when the applicant was washing dishes and cloths on said public hand pump at that moment, at the time the victim objected, and later on, the opposite party No. 2 fought with the applicant. That the applicant was challened under Section 151/107/116 of Cr.P.C. on 25.05.2024 by the concerned police. The photocopy of the challan dated 25.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail on 25.05.2024 and the same was granted to the applicant on the very same day. That when the applicant was released on bail, thereafter the opposite party No. 2 threatened the applicant to face the consequences for using the public hand pump. That thereafter, the opposite party No. 2 in well-planned manner, lodged the first information report saying therein that the applicant molested his daughter, and later the applicant has been charged a commission of the rape. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper unnatural, and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape the victim. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has collaborated with the version of the applicant, which clearly shows that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged against him. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1743 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 14.08.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the learned court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been languishing in jail since 21.06.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 155 of 2024 under Sections 354-D, 376, 506 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Dostpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Vijay Kumar Nishad aged about 28 years son of Shri Sugriv Nishad resident of 59-B Shivpur, Malhipur, Police Station - Chanda, District – Sultanpur, Education – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and his father on 07.05.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 203 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Chanda, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 06.05.2024. The certified copy of the first information report dated 07.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 20.04.2022, the applicant allured his minor daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) and took her away anywhere and when the opposite party No. 2 went to his house then the father of the applicant came to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and given life threat. That on 10.05.2024, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he changed the version of the first information report and also tried to develop his prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 10.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That as per the case diary, on 11.05.2024, the victim was recovered by the concerned police, and on the very same day, the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the concerned police, in which she stated that she had a love relationship with the applicant and went with him on 06.05.2024 with her own WILL and resided under the bamboo tree four days as husband and wife and there is no fault of the applicant in said incident. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 11.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the victim had refused to get examined medically after she was produced before the medical officer of the concerned hospital on 12.05.2024 as she lived with the applicant with her own WILL and itself creates doubt upon the prosecution story and supported the version of the applicant. The photo/typed copy of the denial of the medical of the victim is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer added Section 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in the aforesaid case crime on 13.05.2024. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court on 15.05.2024, in which she stated that she loved the applicant and on 06.05.2024 she was scolded by the opposite party No. 2 as such she went to the river bank with him on 20.04.2022 and resided under the bamboo tree four days as husband and wife with her own WILL. The victim further said that the applicant was arrested by police on 11.05.2024 and later on she went to the police station. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 15.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that the concerned police arrested the applicant on 11.05.2024 and arresting of the applicant on 17.05.2024 for extraneous reasons. That the real story of the case is that the applicant and opposite party No. 2 are residents of the same village. That the victim and applicant have fallen in love since long back and they met regularly with each other. When this fact came to the knowledge of the victim and her family then they came to the applicant’s house and restrained the applicant and victim to continue their love relationship. That the victim stated that she is more than 18 years hence the applicant and victim decided to solemnize their marriage with their own WILL as both are major in age. That on 06.05.2024, the opposite party No. 2 scolded her daughter thereafter the victim called him to meet at river bank. That the applicant and victim resided under the bamboo tree for four days as husband and wife, from where the concerned police arrested the applicant on 11.05.2024 and brought the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 is well aware that her daughter i.e. victim is major in age but he has lodged the first information report saying therein that the victim is a minor. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant and for extraneous reasons, the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape her. That without proper investigation of the case, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on 18.05.2024 against the applicant and under Sections 352, 504, 506 of I.P.C. against his father. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 18.05.2024 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has collaborated with the version of the applicant, which clearly shows that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged against him. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1544 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 09.07.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the learned court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been languishing in jail since 17.05.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 203 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Chanda, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Israr Ahamad alias Buddha aged about 72 years son of Mohd. Sulaman resident of Village – Bhulki, Chhatauna, Police Station – Kotwali Dehat, District – Sultanpur, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – __________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his brother on 24.04.2022 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 394 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 20.04.2022. The certified copy of the first information report dated 24.04.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 20.04.2022, the applicant allured his minor daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) and took her away anywhere, in which the brother of the applicant helped him. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 20.04.2022 but the first information report has been lodged on 24.04.2022 after about 4 days, without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report, which is already questionable and doubtful as the informant and his family lodged aforesaid first information after legal advice. That on 25.04.2022, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he changed the version of the first information report and stated that the applicant eloped his daughter on 24.04.2022 around 06.00 hours and also tried to develop his prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 25.04.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That as per the case diary, on 23.07.2022, the victim has recovered by the concerned police, and on the very same day, the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which she stated that she has a love relationship with the applicant since last two years and went with him on 20.04.2022 with her own WILL and residing at Ayodhya and the applicant has not raped her and she was pregnant at time of her recovery. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 23.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on 23.07.2022, the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 has recorded by the concerned police, in which he stated that his daughter has eloped with the applicant on 20.04.2022. The typed copy of the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer added Section 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in aforesaid case crime on 23.07.2022. That the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police on 20.07.2022 from his rented house i.e. from Ayodhya while showing in arresting memo he has been arrested from another place on 23.07.2022 for extraneous reasons. That the medical of the victim was conducted on 25.07.2022 at District Women Hospital, Sultanpur by the doctor. The radiological age of the victim was ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the medical report dated 25.07.2022 and supplementary medical report dated 27.07.2022 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has recorded before the concerned court on 28.07.2022, in which she stated that she loved the applicant for the last two years and went with him on 20.04.2022 and resided with him in Ayodhya. The victim further said that she was recovered by the police on 20.07.2022. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 28.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that the concerned police recovered the victim on 20.07.2022 from the possession of the applicant from Ayodhya and also arrested the applicant but for showing the recovery of the victim and arresting of the applicant on 23.07.2022 for extraneous reasons. That the real story of the case is that the applicant is the friend of the son of the opposite party No. 2 and visited his house regularly to meet his friend. That the victim and applicant have fallen in love since long back and they met regularly with each other and the victim become pregnant. When this fact came to the knowledge of the victim and her family then they came to the applicant’s house and restrained the applicant and victim to continue their love relationship. That the victim stated that she is more than 18 years hence the applicant and victim decided to solemnize their marriage with their own WILL as both are major in age. That thereafter the victim left her house on 20.04.2022 and came with the applicant and residing in Ayodhya as husband-wife, from where the concerned police arrested the applicant on 20.07.2022 and brought the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 and his family know that the applicant residing in Ayodhya despite a false story cooked up by the concerned police and the opposite party No. 2 for obtaining the money from the state government, which is given to the rape victim. That the opposite party No. 2 lodged the first information report for getting the benefit of Rule 12(4) of the S.C. & S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, which is amended in the year 2016, in which, in the case of the S.C. & S.T. rape victim the state is given Rs. 5 Lacs to the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 is well aware that her daughter i.e. victim is major in age but he has lodged the first information report saying therein that the victim is a minor. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant and for extraneous reasons the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper and unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape her. That without proper investigation of the case, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on 03.08.2022 against the applicant. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 03.08.2022 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not collaborated with each other as such the above statement has no legal validity. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intention. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 2670 of 2022 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 17.08.2022. The free copy of the order dated 17.08.2022 has been misplaced with the deponent hence the certified copy was obtained by him for filing this bail application. The certified copy of the order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 394 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Mohammad Munna Masoqali Hashmi aged about 46 years son of Masoqali Hashmi resident of Om Shiv Shankar Chawl, Pond Pada, Kalwa, District - Thane, Maharastra, Education –Literate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 12.01.2024 at 21.18 hours by the informant namely Mohd. Altaf son of Masooq Ali resident of Village - Mithenpur, Police Station - Kadipur, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 31 of 2024 under Section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 12.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 12.01.2024, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the applicant is the nephew of the informant, who is working with him. On 12.01.2024 the applicant did not go to work with the informant and when his wife namely Sufeena Bano (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was alone at home. Around 3.30 P.M. when the informant returned to his home, he saw the running the applicant from house with a knife. When the informant entered his house he found his wife dead. That the inquest reports of both deceased were prepared by the concerned police on 13.01.2024 in the presence of several persons. That the body of the deceased and another were brought to the P. M., Sultanpur for conducting the post-mortem on 13.01.2024, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘hemorrhage and shock”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem reports of the deceased person dated 13.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 13.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and tried his best to improve his prosecution story and collaborate the same with the post-mortem report of the deceased. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 13.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the investigating officer from his house but for showing his good showed that the applicant arrested from another place. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 14.01.2024 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 14.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 14.01.2024 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police and the statement of the co-accused changed in comparison to the arresting memo. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the alleged murder weapon has not been recovered till date by the concerned police. That the real story is that the applicant is the nephew of the informant and also worked with him and the deceased was an aunt of the applicant. That here it is relevant to mention that the informant doubts his wife so far relates to her character and he always tortured her. That the applicant has no relation with his aunt as alleged by the informant in his first information report and his statement. That on 12.01.2024 the deceased was murdered by some unknown person or by the informant himself as he had doubts about his wife's character but due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant and concerned police, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the police informar. That the concerned police on the basis of the phone location of the applicant, created the false story for extraneous reasons and the same has been repeated by the witnesses of the case crime in a similar manner. That the post-mortem report also did not collaborate with the prosecution's story, which clearly shows that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case crime. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons or by the informant himself as he had doubts about his wife's character but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1019 of 2024 before the learned District & Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 29.04.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 14.01.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 31 of 2024 under Section 302 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Mahabeer aged about 68 years son of Shri Samjhawan resident of Atardasha, Shukul Dulacha, Deara, District - Sultanpur, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – ____________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and his wife on 31.12.2023 at 11.54 hours by the informant namely Sonu Yadav son of Suryabali Yadav resident of Village - Bhartipur, Police Station - Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 388 of 2023 under Section 308, 504 I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur regarding the incident dated 30.12.2023. The certified copy of the first information report dated 31.12.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 31.12.2023, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that due to a land dispute the applicant and his wife were abused and beaten the nephew of the informant namely Pramod Yadav (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) due to which he sustained the injuries, who is under treatment. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the first information report dated 31.12.2023 lodged by the informant to save the deceased and his brother, who were themselves attacked upon the applicant and his wife in retaliation as a counterblast to the first information report lodged by the applicant against the deceased and his brother regarding the same incident bearing Case Crime No. 5 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur. The photocopy of the first information report lodged by the applicant against the deceased and another is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 01.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 01.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on 09.01.2024, during the treatment, the deceased died and the informant moved an application for taking action against the applicant and his wife thereafter the Investigating Officer added Section 323 & 304 of I.P.C. and deleted Section 308 of I.P.C. on 10.01.2024. That the body of the deceased was brought to the KGMU Mortuary, Lucknow for conducting the post-mortem on 10.01.2024, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘antemortem head injury as noted”. The photocopy of the post-mortem report of the deceased dated 10.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded the further statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 11.01.2024 in which the informant changed the version of his first information report version and tried to put gravity in his statement for falsely implicating the applicant and his wife. The typed copy of the further statement of the informant dated 11.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it was very strange that when the Investigating Officer asked the names of the witnesses, then he denied it on the ground that he was sad and not able to tell the names of the witnesses, whereas, after the death of the deceased, he moved an application on 10.01.2024 and gave a further statement on 11.01.2024. That the applicant and his wife were arrested by the concerned police on 11.01.2024 from their home but for showing his good work, their arrest was shown from another place in a forged and fabricated arresting cum recovery memo dated 11.01.2024. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the applicant and his wife have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 11.01.2024 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant and his wife dated 11.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and she has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the applicant and his wife. That the real story is that the applicant’s fife has two sisters and no brother and their mother also expired. That the sister-in-law of the applicant resides at her marital house and not taking care of her father. That the father of the applicant’s mother executed a WILL deed of his entire movable and immovable properties in favour of the applicant on 26.05.2023. The photo/typed copy of the WILL deed dated 26.05.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That after the execution of the WILL deed in favour of the applicant’s wife, her sister & her sons were not happy with the applicant and her family members. That the sister of the applicant’s wife and her sons, on several occasions, fought with her father to get half share in the property but the same was not given to her by the father of the applicant’s wife. That thereafter, the sister and her sons had enmity with the applicant’s wife and his wife and were given the threat to face consequences of the same. As a result of the same, on 30.12.2023, the deceased and his brother beat the applicant & his wife. That during the manhandling, both parties were injured, in which the applicant and his wife sustained the injuries. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the applicant and his wife are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That 09.01.2024 the deceased died thereafter, the gravity of the case has been shifted to the applicant and his wife due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant and concerned police, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the police informar. That the post-mortem report also did not collaborate with the prosecution's story, which clearly shows that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while she has not committed any offense as alleged against her. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 323, 304, 504 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the only general allegations have been assigned against the applicant and no any role has been assigned to the applicant regarding the accident. That the deceased and his brother themselves had a strong motive and with the intention of murder the applicant attacked upon the applicant and in saving the applicant, the deceased also sustained injuries. That the co-accused i.e. wife of the applicant, moved a bail application before this Hon'ble High Court bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 3190 (B) 2024 (Reetu Yadav Versus State of U.P.), in which the wife of the applicant was granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 21.03.2024. The photocopy of the order dated 21.03.2024 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail application No. 861 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur and her bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 06.04.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been in jail since 11.01.2024 without committing any offense. That the applicant is the mother of the one and half year child and without the applicant, no one in her house to take care. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 388 of 2023 under Sections 323, 304, 504 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Sabhajit aged about 48 years son of Shri Sampati resident of Village - Marui, Kishun Daspur, Police Station - Akhand Nagar, District - Sultanpur , District - Sultanpur, Religion – Hindu, Education –Lliterate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the uncle/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the unknown persons on 04.07.2023 at 10.29 hours by the informant namely Tilakraj son of Shri Teeju Rajbhar resident of Village - Marui, Kishundaspur, Police Station - Akhand Nagar, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 202 of 2023 under Section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Akhand Nagar, District – Sultanpur regarding the incident dated 03.07.2023. The certified copy of the first information report dated 04.07.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 04.07.2023, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the younger brother of the informant namely Vijay Rajbhar (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) along with irrigating field on 03.07.2023 around 23.00 hours at that time they were murdered by unknown persons. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant is not named in the first information report. That the inquest reports of both deceased were prepared by the concerned police on 04.07.2023 in the presence of several persons. That the body of the deceased and another were brought to the P. M., Sultanpur for conducting the post-mortem on 04.07.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘hemorrhage and shock” due to firearm injury. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem reports of the deceased persons dated 04.07.2023 are being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 04.07.2023 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and he did not name the applicant or anyone. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 04.07.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the statement of the son of another deceased was also recorded by the concerned police on 04.07.2023, in which he also repeated the version of the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the son of another deceased dated 04.07.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That on 14.07.2023, the alleged police informant informed the investigating officer regarding the murder of the deceased and first time named the applicant and others and narrated a false story against the applicant for extraneous reasons. The typed copy of the CD-8 dated 14.07.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That on 23.07.2023, the statements of three witnesses were recorded by the investigating officer, in which they stated that the applicant was not present at the time alleged incident at the place of occurrence. The typed copies of the statement of three witnesses dated 23.07.2023 are being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That thereafter, the statement of the wife of the deceased and also further statement of the informant were recorded by the concerned police on 25.07.2023, in which they both explained the story, which was stated by the police informer and tried to falsely implicate the applicant. The typed copy of the statement of the wife of the deceased and informant of the case crime are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the story of the police informer, the wife of the deceased, and further statements of the informant are not trustworthy as well as not digestible by the prudent person. That the applicant has been arrested by the investigating officer from his house but for showing his good showed that the applicant arrested from another place. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 12.08.2023 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the arrested accused and applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 12.08.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the arrested co-accused and applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 12.08.2023 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police and the statement of the co-accused changed in comparison to the arresting memo. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the 12.08.2023, the alleged murder weapon was recovered from the pointing of other accused and the recovery memo was prepared by the concerned police. The photocopy of the recovery memo dated 12.08.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 09 to this affidavit. That the real story is that the applicant, informant & deceased are residents of the same village and they know each other. That here it is relevant to mention that around 6 years back, the applicant took a tractor from the deceased and when he failed to repay the money to the deceased then the applicant sold his 2 biswa land to the son of the deceased. That there was no dispute after the execution of the sale deed in the favour of the deceased’s son. That the applicant was present with the deceased persons on 03.07.2023 but he was returned to his house with Rajman Pal around 10.30 PM. That on 03.07.2023 the deceased was murdered by some unknown persons due to their enmity but due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant and concerned police, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the police informar. That the concerned police on the basis of the phone location of the applicant, created the false story for extraneous reasons and the same has been repeated by the witnesses of the case crime in a similar manner. That the post mortem report also did not collaborate with the prosecution's story, which cleary shows that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case crime. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 302, 120-B of I.P.C. at Police Station – Akhand Nagar, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2688 of 2023 before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Sultanpur and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 05.10.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 10 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 12.08.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 202 of 2023 under Sections 302, 120-B of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Akhand Nagar, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Mahabeer aged about 68 years son of Shri Samjhawan resident of Atardasha, Shukul Dulacha, Deara, District - Sultanpur, Religion – Hindu, Education –Lliterate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father-in-law/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and her husband on 31.12.2023 at 11.54 hours by the informant namely Sonu Yadav son of Suryabali Yadav resident of Village - Bhartipur, Police Station - Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 388 of 2023 under Section 308, 504 I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur regarding the incident dated 30.01.2023. The certified copy of the first information report dated 31.12.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 31.12.2023, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that due to a land dispute the applicant and her husband were abused and beaten the nephew of the informant namely Pramod Yadav (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) due to which he sustained the injuries, who is under treatment. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the first information report dated 31.12.2023 lodged by the informant to save the deceased and his brother, who were themselves attacked upon the applicant and her husband in retaliation as a counterblast to the first information report lodged by the applicant against the deceased and his brother regarding the same incident bearing Case Crime No. 5 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur. The photocopy of the first information report lodged by the applicant against the deceased and another is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 01.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 01.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on 09.01.2024, during the treatment, the deceased died and the informant moved an application for taking action against the applicant and her husband thereafter the Investigating Officer added Section 323 & 304 of I.P.C. and deleted Section 308 of I.P.C. on 10.01.2024. That the body of the deceased was brought to the KGMU Mortuary, Lucknow for conducting the post-mortem on 10.01.2024, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘antemortem head injury as noted”. The photocopy of the post-mortem report of the deceased dated 10.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer recorded the further statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 11.01.2024 in which the informant changed the version of his first information report version and tried to put gravity in his statement for falsely implicating the applicant and her husband. The typed copy of the further statement of the informant dated 11.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it was very strange that when the Investigating Officer asked the names of the witnesses, then he denied on the ground that he was sad, whereas, after the death of the deceased he moved an application on 10.01.2024 and gave a further statement on 11.01.2024. That the applicant and her husband were arrested by the concerned police on 11.01.2024 from their home but for showing his good work, their arrest was shown from another place in a forged and fabricated arresting cum recovery memo dated 11.01.2024. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the applicant and her husband have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 11.01.2024 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant and her husband dated 11.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and she has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the applicant and her husband. That the real story is that the applicant is two sisters and no brother and their mother also expired. That the sister of the applicant resides at her marital house and not taking care of her father. That the father of the applicant executed a WILL deed of his entire movable and immovable properties in favour of the applicant on 26.05.2023. The photo/typed copy of the WILL deed dated 26.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That after the execution of the WILL deed in favour of the applicant, her sister & her sons were not happy with the applicant and her family members. That the sister of the applicant and her sons, on several occasions, fought with her father to get half share in the property but the same was not given to her by the father of the applicant. That thereafter, the sister and her sons had enmity with the applicant and her husband and given the threat to face consequences of the same. As a result of the same, on 30.12.2023, the deceased and his brother beat the applicant & her husband. That during the manhandling, both parties were injured, in which the applicant and her husband sustaind the injuries. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the applicant and her husband are being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That 09.01.2024 the deceased died thereafter, the gravity of the case has been shifted to the applicant and her husband due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant and concerned police, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the police informar. That the post-mortem report also did not collaborate with the prosecution's story, which clearly shows that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while she has not committed any offense as alleged against her. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 323, 304, 504 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the only general allegations have been assigned against the applicant and no any role has been assigned to the applicant regarding the accident. That the deceased and his brother themselves had a strong motive and with the intention of murder the applicant attacked upon the applicant and in saving the applicant, the deceased also sustained injuries. That the applicant moved bail application No. 497 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur and her bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 02.03.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 02.03.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 9 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 11.01.2024 without committing any offense. That the applicant is the mother of the one and half year child and without the applicant, no one in her house to take care. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 388 of 2023 under Sections 323, 304, 504 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Smt. Shikha Pandey aged about 30 years wife of Shri Ved Prakash Pandey resident of 33/500, Block - 33, Trilok Puri, East Delhi, Delhi, Education –Literate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the Bua/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and three others on 19.07.2024 at 16.45 hours by the informant namely Smt. Sangeeta Maurya wife of Shri Mahesh Maurya resident of Village - Pahadpur Kalan, Police Station - Karaundikalan, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 153 of 2024 under Section 140(2) of B.N.S.,2023 at Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 19.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 19.07.2024, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that on 18.07.2024 the applicant and others called the informant’s husband namely Mahesh (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’), and later the applicant called the informant and demanded a ransom of Rs. 3 lacks. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 19.07.2024 in which the informant repeated her first information report version with additional facts by which she tried her best to improve his prosecution story to the applicant behind bars. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 19.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the investigating officer from his house but for showing his good work stated that the applicant was arrested from another place along with other accused. That on 20.07.2024, the victim was recovered and his statement under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 was recorded by the investigating officer, in which he almost repeated the statement of the informant and added that the applicant and other accused had beaten him. The typed copy of the statement of the victim dated 20.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the real story is that the applicant and the victim are well-known to each other and on several occasions, the victim has taken a loan from the applicant and his wife. That when the loan was not returned by the victim on time then on several demands, he had given a cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/- in the name of the applicant’s wife. The photocopy of the cheque given by the victim is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the victim requested the applicant not to present the cheque until he said and when several requests were made for payment then the victim denied for payment and was given the threat to falsely implicate him in a criminal case. That thereafter, in well planned manner, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the informant. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the kidnapping and demand of ransom in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 140 (2) of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2149 of 2024 before the learned District Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 27.08.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant has been in jail since 19.07.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 153 of 2024 under Section 140 (2) of B.N.S., 2023 relating to the Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Smt. Shikha Pandey aged about 30 years wife of Shri Ved Prakash Pandey resident of 33/500, Block - 33, Trilok Puri, East Delhi, Delhi, Education –Literate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the sister/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and three others on 19.07.2024 at 16.45 hours by the informant namely Smt. Sangeeta Maurya wife of Shri Mahesh Maurya resident of Village - Pahadpur Kalan, Police Station - Karaundikalan, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 153 of 2024 under Section 140(2) of B.N.S.,2023 at Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 19.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 19.07.2024, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that on 18.07.2024 the applicant and others called the informant’s husband namely Mahesh (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’), and later the applicant called the informant and demanded a ransom of Rs. 3 lacks. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 19.07.2024 in which the informant repeated her first information report version with additional facts by which she tried her best to improve his prosecution story to the applicant behind bars. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 19.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the investigating officer from his house but for showing his good work stated that the applicant was arrested from another place along with other accused. That on 20.07.2024, the victim was recovered and his statement under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 was recorded by the investigating officer, in which he almost repeated the statement of the informant and added that the applicant and other accused had beaten him. The typed copy of the statement of the victim dated 20.07.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the real story is that the applicant and the victim are well-known to each other and on several occasions, the victim has taken a loan from the applicant and his wife. That when the loan was not returned by the victim on time then on several demands, he had given a cheque of Rs. 4,39,000/- in the name of the applicant’s wife on 25.05.2024. The photocopy of the cheque dated 25.05.2024 given by the victim is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the victim requested the applicant not to present the cheque until he said and when several requests were made for payment then the victim denied for payment and was given the threat to falsely implicate him in a criminal case. That thereafter, in well planned manner, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the informant. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the kidnapping and demand of ransom in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 140 (2) of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2050 of 2024 before the learned District Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 27.08.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant has been in jail since 19.07.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 153 of 2024 under Section 140 (2) of B.N.S., 2023 relating to the Police Station – Karaundikalan, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Pradeep Kumar Yadav aged about 38 years son of Shri Mata Prasad resident of 16 A, Devkali Kotwa, Lahanganj, District - Sultanpur, Education –Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the uncle/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 08.08.2024 at 22.31 hours by the informant namely Smt. Sumirta wife of Late Jagdeen resident of Village - Bhiti Bubane Ka Pura, Police Station - Bhiti, District - Ambedkar Nagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 230 of 2024 under Sections 85, 108 of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Jaisinghpur, District – Sultanpur with regard to incident dated 01.08.2024. The certified/typed copy of the first information report dated 08.08.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 08.08.2024, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the marriage of the daughter of the informant namely Roshni (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) with the applicant in the year 2008 and the applicant has illicit relation with someone. On 01.08.2024, the deceased caught the applicant and recorded a video, for which the applicant beat the deceased and stated her to commit suicide. Thereafter the deceased committed suicide and when the informant reached at the place of inicident, the police were there. That according to the first information report, the deceased committed suicide on 01.08.2024 but the the first information report was lodged by the informant after seven days, after getting legal advice, when the applicant did not fulfill the illegal demands of the informant. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant to get financial benefits. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the applicant himself and other persons on 01.08.2024. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 02.08.2024 at District Hospital, Sultanpur wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors, and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Asphysia’ due to ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 02.08.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about one and half day back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 09.08.2024 in which the informant repeated her first information report version with additional facts by which she tried her best to improve her prosecution story to send the applicant behind bars. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.08.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the statement of the sisters of the deceased were also recorded by the concerned police under section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 09.08.2024 in which they repeated the version of the informant in their own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant in said case crime. That on the basis of the false first information report, the applicant was arrested by the concerned police from his house on 09.08.2024. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized according to the Hindu rituals in the year 2008. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and his family from the informant and her family as dowry prior to and after the marriage. That initially the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased and the deceased and applicant were blessed with two sons namely Dev Kumar and Diyansh. That the applicant was residing at Surat, Gujarat with the deceased and his sons, where they studied. That thereafter, the financial position of the applicant was not good as a result of the same, he was returned to his native place and he admitted his sons to school at his native place. That later on, as the deceased was a dominant and ambitious lady as such she wanted to live separately from the other family members of the applicant and as such created a regular nuisance in the family to reside at Surat. That the applicant called the informant and requested to convince the deceased to stay at his native place until he was not in a position to bring her to Surat but despite convincing the deceased, the informant accelerated the demands of the deceased. That due to the denial of leaving the village, the deceased was annoyed and stopped talking with the applicant and also did not properly take care of the little sons. That prior to that incident, the deceased several times locked herself in the room but always opened the door within a couple of hours. The applicant and other family members of the applicant were well aware of the short-tempered nature of the deceased thus the applicant was rest assured that the door would open soon. That due to her shot-tempered nature, the deceased committed suicide on 01.08.2024 due to her own reasons but the informant has lodged the first information report against the applicant when the applicant denied fulfilling the demand of the informant, which was for Rs. 3 lakhs for not lodging the first information report against him. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant was not at home, when the deceased committed suicide, and when he returned home after the incident, he himself moved an application before the concerned Police Station regarding the incident on 01.08.2024the applicant himself regarding the unfortunate incident. The said application has been brought on record by the concerned police on 01.08.2024. The typed copy of the General Diary No. 61 dated 01.08.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the concerned police came to the incident place and entered the room, where the deceased committed suicide after breaking the door of the room. That the applicant never beaten the deceased as alleged by the informant and others. The investigating officer recorded the statements of the sons of the applicant under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 on 29.08.2024, in which they said that the applicant never beat the deceased. The typed copies of the statements of the sons of the applicant is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant after getting legal advice just for her satisfaction while she is well aware that her daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons. That Pratibha against the informant alleged that the applicant has illicit relations with her, is the sister of the applicant and she also opposed the illegal demands of the informant as such the informant annoyed and levelled false allegations. That so far video recording, which has been stated by the informant and others, has not been recovered by the concerned police till date, which shows that the informant is telling a lie regarding the character of the applicant. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant. That the applicant is being the husband of the deceased falsely implicated in the said case crime by the informant while the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 85, 108 of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Jaisinghpur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2155 of 2024 before the learned District Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 05.09.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been in jail since 09.08.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 230 of 2024 under Sections 85, 108 of B.N.S., 2023 relating to the Police Station – Jaisinghpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Gulsher aged about 19 years son of Alisher resident of Village – Balbhaddarpur, Police Station - Jamo, District - Amthi Religion – Muslim, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – _________, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is ________ of the applicant and doing pairvi of the applicant in the above-noted case and duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the application, as well as this affidavit, have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant as such he is fully conversant with the same. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 78 of 2023 under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Jamo, District – Amethi on 25.03.2023 at 12.32 hours against the applicant. The first information report has lodged by Shri Hardev Bahadur Singh, Sub Inspector, Police Station - Jamo, District – Amethi (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified/ type copy of the first information report dated 25.03.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report dated 25.03.2023 that on 25.03.2023 the informant along with his team on patrolling the area. When the informant reached about 400 meters ahead of Uday Bhan Singh's rice mill in Balabhadra village, a man was seen walking from the front. As soon as he saw the policemen, all of a sudden he turned backward and started to escape. And thereafter the applicant was arrested by them and admitted that he was bringing smack from Shahmau. That's why I ran away after seeing you guys. That the informant recovered 55 grams of smack from the possession of the applicant by the informant and his team. That reality is that nothing has been found by the informant or his team from the applicant’s possession but contrary to the provisions and established rules, the informant shows the recovery from the applicant’s possession. That here it is relevant to mention that the recovery cum arresting memo was prepared by the informant and a copy has been given to the applicant, on which there are no signatures of the team of the informant. That it is relevant to mention here that the contents of the first information report are beyond the truth as well as imagination. The story of the informant does not collaborate with the fact and circumstances of the alleged case crime. That the applicant is the common person of society and has no concern with the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance and the concerned police arrested the applicant from Jamo market but without any reason and falsely implicate in said case crime for showing his good work. That there is no concern with recovered Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance in any manner with the applicant as he is not involved in such type act and the police concerned falsely implicated in said case crime for extraneous reasons, which is itself wrong and incorrect. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence while the applicant was arrested about 10.15 hours and there is no any independent eye witness of the said recovery and it is a case of forge, fabricated and false and there is no any evidence against the applicant. That the informant stated in his first information report that he has complied the provisions of the Section 50 Section of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, while no any gazetted officer was not present at the time of arrest of the applicant, which is duly cleared from the perusal of the recovery memo, which is the part and parcel of the first information report. There is no signature of any gazetted officer on the recovery memo, which is not supported by the version of the prosecution. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concerns about any type of the act as mentioned in the first information report. The informant for the purpose of getting the reward from the state government, falsely implicates the applicant in said case. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 25.03.2023. That the applicant has not concerned with the recovered smack as alleged by the informant and also the statement of the informant totally baseless and same is not reliable in manner. That the informant has no any independent witnesses of the alleged recovery because the applicant has not committed any offence. The informant concocted the story and stated that the applicant has confessed his guilty during the recovery of the alleged smack. That the informant has not complied with the provisions of Section 50 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as the Circle Officer is not a Gazette Officer, according to Section 42 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as such entire raid conducted is null and void. That there is no special or general order has been passed by the Central or State government to empower the sub-inspector of the police department to enter, search, seizure, and arrest without warrant or authorization. That till date the concerned police have not produced any sufficient evidence against the applicant to prove the involvement of the applicant in the case crime. That till date there is no forensic report (chemical report) of the recovered substance has been received by the informant to establish their story that the applicant is involved in the business of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but she has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant has no criminal history apart from the instant criminal case, in which he has been falsely implicated by the informant for extraneous reasons. That the applicant is in jail since 25.03.2023 without committing any offense. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing number 1421 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge N.D.P.S. Act, Room No. 7, Sultanpur on insufficient grounds vide order dated 12.05.2023. Here it is relevant to mention that the free certified copy of the order dated 12.05.2023 was misplaced with the deponent hence the certified copy of the order is annexed with the bail application. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 12.05.2023 passed by the court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in relation to case crime No. 78 of 2023 under Sections 8/21 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station – Jamo, District – Amethi, during the pendency of the case. |
I, Ram Bali Singh aged about 64 years son of Shri Ram Lakhan Singh resident of 66/A, Railway Colony Talkatora Road, Near Balak Paan Bhandar, V. G. Tikait Garden, Alambagh, Bakshi Ka Talab, District - Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Ex-Serviceman, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the uncle/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the appellant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case are that a First Information Report has been lodged against the applicant and five other persons, on 03.01.2023 at 10.56 hours by the informant namely Smt. Maya Singh wife of Shri Indrasen Singh resident of Village - Mudaha, Police Station - Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 147, 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 30.12.2022 only on basis of wrong, false and presumption. The certified/photocopy of the First Information Report dated 03.01.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant alleged therein that on 30.12.2022 at around 07.30 PM, Vipin Singh, son of the informant was returning home and when he reached the Mudaha Minor bridge, the applicant and other accused beat her son with lathi, hockey sticks, iron rod, and sharp weapons and threw her into the canal. After hearing the commotion and seeing the family members coming, the applicant and the other accused ran away thinking that the son of the informant was dead. The informant further alleged that the applicant and others were abusing them, when her son was brought to CHC Motigarpur in an unconscious state, from where he was referred to District Hospital Sultanpur. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 30.12.2022 at 19.30 hours but the first information report has been lodged around four days delay i.e. on 03.01.2023 at 10.56 hours without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report, which is already questionable and doubtful as the informant and her family lodged aforesaid first information after legal advice. That the son of the informant was brought to the hospital where his treatment was done, in which several injuries were noted by the doctor concerned. The photo/type copy of the medical of the informant’s son along with the endorsement made in the case diary are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That on a bare perusal of the medical records of the son of the informant, it is clear that Section 307 of I.P.C. is not attracted as there are no any grievous injuries to the son of the informant. That here it is relevant to mention that the aforesaid First Information Report has been lodged by the informant on false, incorrect, and baseless grounds in a counterblast attack in retaliation as the mother of the namely Vijay Laxmi has lodged a First Information Report on 05.01.2023 against the son of the informant and 8 others bearing Case Crime No. 6 of 2023 under Sections 147, 307, 323, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur. The photocopy of the First Information Report dated 05.01.2023 lodged by the applicant’s mother is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the informant, on the basis of legal advice lodged the said First Information Report against the applicant and other accused for his son’s safeguard as the son of the informant himself along with companions tried to murder the applicant’s father but he failed and during said manhandling between the applicant and son of the informant and his companions, four persons applicant’s side, sustained the injuries. That the allegations leveled against the applicant are very superficial, vague, indefinite, and of such nature that the applicant cannot be held guilty. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in her first information report dated 03.01.2023. That on 04.01.2023, the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she almost repeated her First Information Report but she stated that due to enmity the applicant and others committed the case crime. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 04.01.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the two eyewitnesses of the case crime has been recorded their statements under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 08.02.2023, in which they repeated the version of the informant however, they have not assigned any specific role to the applicant. The typed copies of the statement of the eyewitnesses of the case crime dated 08.02.2023 are being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer of the case crime, recorded statements of several independent witnesses of the case crime under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 22.02.2023, in which they all again repeat the statement of the informant in their own words. The typed copies of the statements of the independent witnesses of the case crime dated 22.02.2023 are being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the version of the First Information Report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her First Information Report so far concerned to the applicant, which has been revealed from the perusal of the statements of the eyewitness and independent witnesses of the case crime. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 21.04.2023 without any basis merely on the basis of the statement of the informant, who was named by the applicant for saving her son from the commissioning of the case crime No. 06 of 2023 while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the Charge Sheet on 24.04.2023 under Sections 147, 307, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C. against the applicant and another for extraneous reasons. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged against him by the informant. That the applicant and informant are residents of the same village and are pattidar but the son of the informant and his companions are hardened criminals against them several criminal cases have been lodged. That including the applicant and his family members as well as several villagers, who have been facing the inconvenience from the illegal activities of the son of the informant and his companions. The applicant and his father boldly opposed the son of the informant due to the applicant’s family being on target of the son of the informant. That on 30.12.2022 around 18.45 hours, the informant’s son and his companions assaulted the father of the applicant and his family members including his uncle and others with lathi, danda, and iron rod, and the applicant and his family members saved their life anyhow, however, they have sustained the injuries. The photo/ typed copies medical of the applicant and his family members are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That thereafter the mother of the applicant moved an application for lodging the FIR against the informant’s sons and others but due to man, muscle, and money power of them, her FIR was not lodged by the concerned police even when the application was moved by the mother of the applicant prior to the application moved by the informant before the concerned police. That for the extraneous reason, after lodging the first information report against the applicant and others, the concerned police lodged the first information report on 05.01.2023 against the son of the informant and 8 others bearing Case Crime No. 6 of 2023 under Sections 147, 307, 323, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur. That here it is relevant to mention that the first information report was lodged by the mother of the applicant, the concerned police for extraneous reasons, not concluding the investigation of the same. That the applicant has no concern with the allegations of the informant in any manner and also the prosecution story is totally against the truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely on the basis of extraneous reason, the applicant has been framed in the said case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant has committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima-facie offense under Sections 147, 307, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention with the collusion of the concerned police for an ulterior motive. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1477 of 2023 before the learned Session Judge, Sultanpur and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 08.05.2023 without considering the fact of the case. Here it is relevant to mention that the free certified copy of the order dated 08.05.2023 has been misplaced by the deponent due to which another certified copy of the order has been prepared for filing this bail application. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 08.05.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 21.04.2023. The applicant categorically submits that he has no any criminal history nor he has ever been convicted by any court of law. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertake that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that grant bail to the applicant in relation to Case Crime No. 02 of 2023 under Sections 147, 307, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Ram Raj Pal aged about 57 years son of Shri Ram Bachan resident of Payag Patti, Paigapur, Palahipur, District - Sultanpur, Education – Literate, Occupation – _________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the _________/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the appellant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That in Case Crime No. 28 of 2023 under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Bandhua Kalan, District – Sultanpur, another bail application bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 12662 (B) of 2023 (Sadhuram Pal Vs State of U.P.) has been allowed by Hon'ble Justice Shri Subhash Vidyarthi ‘J’ vide its order dated 30.10.2023. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case are that a First Information Report has been lodged against the applicant and three other persons, on 23.02.2023 at 11.56 hours by the informant namely Shri Nanhe Lal son of Shri Ram Prasad resident of Village - Narharpur hamlet of Pikaura, Police Station - Bandhua Kalan, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Bandhua Kalan, District – Sultanpur. The certified/photocopy of the First Information Report dated 23.02.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant alleged therein that on 23.02.2023 at about 7.00 A.M., the village pradhan Nandlal Pal (accused of the case crime) called the informant's son Amit Kumar at temple through mobile, as his son reached near to the temple then Nandlal Pal, Sadhuram Pal, Salikram Pal and Sachin Pal, who are already sitting there started hurling abuses and hitting him with lathi-danda and hand, legs-punches, when the son of the informant raised the alarm to his rescue and then informant's wife Gudiya came in rescue for her son. Then, they beat his wife also, and his son Amit sustained many serious injuries. That the injured were brought to the hospital where their treatment was done, in which several injuries were noted by the doctor concerned. The photo/type copies of the medical reports of the injured persons are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That on a bare perusal of the medical records of the son of the informant, it is clear that Section 308 of I.P.C. is not attracted as there are no any grievous injuries to the son of the informant. That here it is relevant to mention that the aforesaid First Information Report has been lodged by the informant on false, incorrect, and baseless grounds. That the allegations leveled against the applicant are very superficial, vague, indefinite, and of such nature that the applicant cannot be held guilty. Only general allegations have been made by the informant and no role has been assigned to the applicant. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 23.02.2023. That on 24.02.2023, the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she almost repeated her First Information Report but she stated that due to enmity the applicant and others committed the case crime. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 24.02.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the statements of the son & wife of the informant were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 12.03.2023, in which they repeated the version of the informant however, they have also not assigned any specific role to the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the son & wife of the informant dated 12.03.2023 are being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That here it is relevant to mention that neither the informant nor his son & wife assigned any reason or motive for the commission of the aforesaid case crime. That the version of the First Information Report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her First Information Report so far concerned to the applicant. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on without any basis merely on the basis of the statement of the informant, who was named by the applicant, his son & wife, while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer submitted the Charge Sheet on 14.03.2023 under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. against the applicant and 3 others for extraneous reasons. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offense as alleged against him by the informant. That the applicant and informant are residents of the same village and the informant’s family members opposed the present Village Pradhan in the Village Pradhan election, due to which they have enmity with each other. However, the applicant and other named accused are supporters of the village pradhan. That the informant had several works from the village pradhan but due to political enmity the informant had a dispute with the village pradhan. That on 23.02.2023, the son of the informant was met with the village pradhan, where they fought with each other. The applicant and others were present and they tried to stop the fight but the son of the informant threatened the applicant and others to face consequences of the same. That thereafter, the informant lodged the first information report against the applicant and others on the basis of the wrong and incorrect facts. That the applicant has no concern with the allegations of the informant in any manner and also the prosecution story is totally against the truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely on the basis of extraneous reason, the applicant has been framed in the said case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant has committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Bandhua Kalan, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention with the collusion of the concerned police for an ulterior motive. That the applicant moved bail application No. 153 of 2024 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Sultanpur and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 08.02.2024 without considering the facts of the case. Here it is relevant to mention that the free certified copy of the order dated 08.02.2024 has been misplaced by the deponent due to which another certified copy of the order has been prepared for filing this bail application. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 08.02.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since ___.___.______. The applicant categorically submits that he has no any criminal history nor he has ever been convicted by any court of law. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that grant bail to the applicant in relation to Case Crime No. 28 of 2023 under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Bandhua Kalan, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice. |
I, Shivam Singh aged about 26 years son of Shri Brijesh Kumar Singh resident of Village - Pure Belkhariyan Gauripur, Chhota, Post - Bishundaspur, District - Amethi, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – ___________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the nephew/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the appellant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case are that a First Information Report has been lodged against three persons, on 21.08.2023 at 14.40 hours by Shri Amit Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 409, 420 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Chinhat, District – Lucknow. The certified/photocopy of the First Information Report dated 21.08.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant alleged that he ordered 25 Ton Sariya from Patna, Bihar on 17.08.2023, which was sent to him by the seller through transport i.e. vehicle No. UP44-T6023. The informant was regularly in touch of the driver of vehicle No. UP44-T6023 namely Ramji Upadhayay and Transporter, but on 21.08.2023, the mobile of the driver switched off and his material was not delivered to him. That the applicant is not named in the said first information report. That meanwhile, Case Crime No. 223 of 2023 under Section 411 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station - Jamon, District - Amethi on 28.08.2023, in which the applicant has been arrested along with two other persons. The photocopy of the first information report dated 28.08.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant at the time of his arrest with regard to stolen material of Case Crime No. 375 of 2023, however, the recovery of Rs. 48,000/- has been mentioned in the recovery-cum-arresting memo. That the Investigating Officer of Case Crime 223 of 2023, has written/ prepared and recorded the same as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. That the confessional statements of the applicant and other accused were recorded by the concerned police under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the co-accused of Case Crime No. 375 of 20223 in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused along with the applicant. That the name of the applicant came to light in Case Crime No. 375 of 2023 from the statement of the accused of the case crime namely Ramji Upadhyaya i.e. driver of vehicle No. UP44-T6023. That here it is relevant to mention that the aforesaid First Information Report has been lodged by the informant on false, incorrect, and baseless grounds merely on the basis of the presumption and under the life threat of the concerned police the applicant has been named in impugned case crime. That the allegations leveled against the applicant are very superficial, vague, indefinite, and of such nature that the applicant cannot be held guilty. That it is most relevant to mention here that the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged by the informant in his first information report dated 21.08.2023. That the version of the First Information Report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his First Information Report so far concerned to the applicant. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police of District - Amethi on 28.08.2023 without any basis and leveled allegations against him regarding stolen material while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged against him by the informant. That on perusal of the arresting-cum-recovery memo dated 28.08.2023 prepared by the concerned police of the District - Amethi, stated that on 28.08.2023 around 17.12 hours when the applicant was allegedly arrested, the concerned police used the torch to stop the tractor, while in the month of August around 17.12 hours, there is no need of torch. That the applicant has no concern with the allegations of the informant and co-accused in any manner and also the prosecution story is totally against the truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely on the basis of extraneous reason, the applicant has been framed in the said case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant has committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Sections 409, 420 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Chinhat, District – Lucknow is made out against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention with the collusion of the concerned police for an ulterior motive. That apart from above above case, against the applicant a false case has been lodged bearing Case Crime No. 223 of 2023 under Section 411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station - Jamon, District - Amethi, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court below on 02.09.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 02.09.2023 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant has never been convicted by any court of law. That the applicant moved bail application No. 8035 of 2023 before the learned Special Judge, C.B.I. Court No. 3, Lucknow, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 20.10.2023 without considering the facts of the case. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 20.10.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the applicant is in jail since 28.08.2023 without committing the offense. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that grant bail to the applicant in relation to Case Crime No. 375 of 2023 under Sections 409, 420 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Chinhat, District – Lucknow, in the interest of justice. |
I, Kallu aged about 58 years son of Jalim resident of Pure Atbal Purwa, Rajapur, District – Gonda, Education – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 22.07.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 333 of 2024 under Section 137(2) of B.N.S., 2023 at Police Station – Paraspur, District – Gonda regarding incident dated 16.07.2024. The certified copy of the first information report dated 22.07.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 16.07.2024, the applicant lured away the sister of the opposite party No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’), in which co-accused Muskan helped the applicant. That the first information report was lodged around 6 days from the date of the alleged incident without giving any sufficient reason for delay, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the statement of the victim under Section 180 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been recorded by the concerned police, in which she changed the version of the first information report and stated another story. That the investigating officer added Section 65(1) of B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 during the investigation. That the statement of the victim under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., 2023 was recorded before the concerned court, in which she changed her statement and also tried to develop his prosecution story to send the applicant behind bars. That the real story of the case is that the applicant and opposite party No. 2 are residents of the same area. That the applicant had not committed any offense as alleged by the opposite party No. 2 but he was falsely implicated in the case crime due to village party bandi. That thereafter, the opposite party No. 2 in well-planned manner, lodged the first information report saying therein that the applicant abducted his sister, and later the applicant has been charged a commission of the rape. That the prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper unnatural, and unbelievable for a prudent man. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under Section 180 & 183 of B.N.S.S., 2023 Cr.P.C. has not collaborated with each other, which clearly shows that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged against him. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1621 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Gonda, and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Gonda on 12.08.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 12.08.2024 passed by the learned court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been languishing in jail since 29.07.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 333 of 2024 under Sections 137(2), 65(1) of B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Paraspur, District – Gonda, in the interest of justice. |