Datasets:

SHASWATSINGH3101
/

bail-Pre-training_JSONL_V1

Modalities:

Text

Formats:

Size:

Libraries:

License:

Dataset card Viewer Files Files and versions Community

Dataset Viewer

Auto-converted to Parquet

Full Screen Viewer

Full Screen

Split (1)

train · 197 rows

text stringlengths 1.93k 19.2k
I, Manoj Kumar Kori aged about 35 years son of Shri Moti Lal Kori resident of Dharu Shahpur, Laxmikant Ganj, Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education– Literate, Occupation – Tailor, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of applicant No. 1 and relative of another applicant and duly authorized by the applicants to swear this affidavit on their behalf 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 him as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court. No other bail application is pending before this or rejected by this . That brief fact of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the applicants on 21.12.2021 based on false and fabricated grounds, by the informant with regard to her rape bearing Case Crime No. 330 of 2021, under Sections 376D, 452, 354-B, 506 of IPC at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 21.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That according to the first information report lodged by one Seema Devi wife of Phool Chandra Kori resident of Village – Dharu Shahpur, Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), on 22.09.2021 around 18.00 hours, when the informant was at her home alone at that time the applicants entered their house and both have raped her. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 22.09.2021 around 18.00 hours but the first information report has been lodged on 21.12.2021 after about three months, 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 first information report has been lodged by the informant against the applicants on the wrong and incorrect facts in counterblast to save her husband in retaliation of the first information report lodged against her husband and two others on 05.12.2021 by the daughter-in-law of the applicant No. 1 bearing Case Crime No. 315 of 2021 under Sections 376D, 504, 506, 452 of IPC and 3(i)Da, 3(i)Dha, 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which concerned police also submitted the charge sheet No. 26 of 2022 dated 17.02.2022 against the husband of the husband of the informant and others under Sections 376D, 504, 506, 452 of IPC and 3(i)Da, 3(i)Dha, 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act. The photocopy of the first information report dated 05.12.2021 lodged by the daughter-in-law of the applicant No. 1 against the husband of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That after lodging the first information report, the statement of the informant has been recorded on 25.12.2021 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which the informant almost repeated her version of the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 25.12.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the medical of the informant was conducted on 28.12.2021 at C.H.C. Sangipur, Pratapgarh by the doctor, in which nothing has been found with regard to the rape as alleged by the informant. Here it is also relevant that according to the medical report, the informant has sustained no injuries. The photocopy of the medical report dated 28.12.2021 of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the medical report of the informant has not collaborated with the allegations as nothing has been found in medical. That on 10.01.2022, the statement of the informant under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the concerned Magistrate under the influence of her family. The informant her prosecution story stated that when the applicants have runway after the commission of the crime then immediately she told the entire story to her grandfather-in-law & grandmother-in-law and when her husband returned home after three days then she told her. The typed copy of the statement of the informant under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 10.01.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the investigation of the case crime was not done properly and the statement of the informant under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. after 20 days of lodging the first information report, by which the investigation officer has not complied with the provisions of Section 164(5)A of Cr.P.C.. That the statement of the informant under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. is under having several contradictions as such the above statement has no legal validity. That on a bare perusal of the first information report, the statements of the informant, there are several differences, which create doubt upon the prosecution story. That the aforesaid first information report has lodged by the informant after taking legal advice to falsely implicate the applicants in said case crime for purpose of taking revenge to the applicants, as the first information report lodged against her husband, the applicants are witnesses and also getting money from the state, which will be given to the rape victims. That the real story of the case is in a nutshell that the informant and applicants are residents of the same village. That the husband of the informant and two others have been raped with the daughter-in-law of the applicant No. 1 on 18.09.2021 against them a first information report bearing Case Crime No. 315 of 2021 under Sections 376D, 504, 506, 452 of IPC and 3(i)Da, 3(i)Dha, 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh on 05.12.2021. That the informant, when came to know that a first information report would be lodged against her husband and others then all have on basis of legal advice, filed an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. before the court concerned for the safeguarding of offenders. That in compliance with the order passed by the learned court below, the said first information report against the applicants. That without proper investigation and appreciation of the evidence relating to the allegations made against the applicant No. 1, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet No. 195 of 2022 under Sections 376D, 452, 354-B, 504, 506 of IPC on 12.08.2022 and against the applicant No. 2 on 23.09.2022 bearing charge sheet No. 195A of 2022. That the whole story was cooked by the informant and her husband along with culprits of the Case Crime No. 315 of 2021, against the applicants and explained by the concerned police. That the informant has no ocular witness and prosecution story as narrated therein highly improbable, improper and unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man, especially when he herself gives contradictive statements. That the informant never raises any alarm with regard to the incident in any manner, if she was raped by the applicants and the explanation given by the informant regarding not raising of alarm, is not possible in any manner. That the medical report of the informant is also not collaborating with the story of the prosecution, as per the medical of informant nothing has been found. That since the applicants have not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant and her husband in malafide intention. That the false story cooked up by the concerned police and the informant/informant and her husband for obtaining money from the state government, which is given to the rapped informant and taking revenge from the applicants. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the prosecution story as narrated in the first information report is highly improbable, improper and unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 400 of 2023 before Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 6, Pratapgarh and their bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 23.02.2023 without considering the fact of the case. The free certified copy of the order dated 23.02.2023 passed by the court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant No. 1 in jail since 09.08.2022 and applicant No. 2 since 13.09.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That the applicants have no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and are not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicants absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants are 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 applicants be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 330 of 2021, under Sections 376D, 452, 354-B, 504, 506 of IPC at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice.
I, Prem Tiwari aged about 37 years son of Shri Ram Sajeevan Tiwari resident of Pure Lautan Tiwari, Katawan, Police Station - Kurwar, District - Sultanpur, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Lliterate, 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. 111 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 63, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, at Police Station – Aalapur, District – Ambedkar Nagar on 26.03.2023 at 06.16 hours against the applicant and another. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 26.03.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Bechu Singh Yadav, Staton House Officer, Police Station - Aalapur, District – Ambedkar Nagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the informant and his team (other police personnel) were on patrolling of the area and at that time the informant got information from his informer (eq[kfcj) in regard of huge adulterated liquor is transporting through tanker No. UP 42 BT 9710. That the raid has been conducted by the informant along with his team on 26.03.2023 and arrested the applicant and another from the spot and also seized a lot of adulterated liquor from inside of the tanker. That the applicant is a common man of society and has no concerns with the adulterated liquor and during the raid the applicant was not present at the place of the alleged incident, the concerned police arrested the applicant from his 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 applicant are falsely implicated by the informant himself due to their own personal revenge, which has been explained by the concerned police as the ulterior motive. That the informant had personal revenge on the applicant. When the informant was posted as Station House Officer at Police Station - Jaisinghpur, District - Sultanpur, he was randomly checking the papers of the vehicles on the road along with the police team. That the applicant was stopped by a constable and brought to the informant to show his papers. The applicant had all the requisite papers but the informant demanded money from the applicant, which was denied by the applicant. That the informant and his team misbehaved and abused then the applicant strongly opposed, due to which several people gathered and raised their voices against the informant for his illegal demand. That before leaving the place of said incident, the informant had threatened the applicant to face the consequences of said opposition. That the informant had enmity with the applicant and was searching for a chance to falsely implicate the applicant in crime. That when the informant posted at another Police Station i.e. at Police Station - Aalapur then on 26.03.2023, the applicant was in his village, at the time the applicant was arrested by the informant from his house and he has been falsely implicated in the case crime by him due to his self-satisfaction due to old enmity. That it is 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 the time of the alleged raid, even the informant and Excise Inspector were themselves not assured that the recovered liquor is adulterated. That on a bare perusal of the first information report, it is also evident that there were no witnesses of the raid conducted by the informant, which also creates doubts upon the story of the informant, which itself concocted and false. That according to the prosecution story, it is clearly revealed that no one saw the occurrence and there are no independent eyewitnesses of the said recovery, it is a case of the forge, fabricated and false and there is no evidence against the applicant. That the applicant has no concerns with the vehicle i.e. UP 42 BT 9710, in which the alleged adulterated liquor was recovered/seized by the informant but it was showing that the in the first information report that the applicant said, the applicant is the owner of the vehicle, who had purchased the said vehicle in the name of another person. That the informant has not arrested the applicant at the alleged place of recovery or even not found anything from the applicant’s possession. That till date there is no chemical report stating therein that the recovered liquor was obnoxious or spurious for human consumption. That on 26.03.2023, a first information report has been lodged by the concerned police due to extraneous consideration; the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That the applicant is in jail since 26.03.2023 without committing any offense as alleged against them. That nothing has been recovered from the applicant’s possession by the informant and if any recovery is made, the applicant has no concern with recovered adulterated liquor in any manner as such the Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 63, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 made against him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Ambedkar Nagar bearing Bail Application No. 319 of 2023, which has been rejected by the court concerned without going into the fact and records of the case. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 20.05.2023 passed by the court concerned 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 due to the false implication of the applicant in the case crime, his business has been ruined and his family is coming on the road. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concerns. 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. He has never been convicted in any case and has not been involved in any criminal activities ever. There is no criminal history against the applicant except in this present case. That there is no chance of the 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 with 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 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. 111 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 63, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 registered at Police Station – Aalapur, District – Ambedkar Nagar, in the interest of justice.
I, Narendra Bahadur Singh aged about 45 years son of Shri Anand Bahadur Singh resident of Sarai Khande, Dughvan, Sarai Khande Mu, District - Hardoi, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self-employed, 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. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the counsel of the applicants has explained the contents of the application as well as this affidavit in Hindi to the deponent and he understands the same in his language. 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 person on 13.11.2023 at 08.30 hours by Shri Vishram son of Late Kallu, Police Station – Kheron, District - Hardoi resident of Village - Pahadpur hamlet of Ahiri, Police Station - Baghauli, District – Hardoi (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Section 304 of IPC at Police Station – Baghauli District – Hardoi. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 13.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 13.11.2023 by the informant alleged therein that on 13.11.2023 around 5.00 AM, the grandson of the informant namely Anurag (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’), who was the son of the applicant, was crying for going to his grandmother. When the grandson of the informant came out at that time the applicant hit the deceased with a stick. The deceased was brought to the CHC, Ahirori but he died on the way. That on a bare perusal of the first information report, it is clear that there is no reason or intention assigned for committing the murder of the deceased, who was the 7-year-old son of the applicant, which creates doubt about the prosecution story. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same is depends upon the concocted story and nothing has been done by the applicant as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That on 13.11.2023, the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of several persons, who repeated the version of the first information report. The photo/typed copy of the inquest report dated 13.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the post-mortem of the deceased was conducted at _____________, in which only injury was shown and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘_____________________’. The photo/typed copy of the post-mortem report dated ……………….. is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the concerned police recovered the murder weapon of the alleged murder on pointing at the applicant on 14.11.2023, after his arrest from his house. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 14.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 13.11.2023 in which the informant gave approximately the same statement as mentioned in the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 13.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That several statements of the witnesses, who are the grandmother and cousin brother of the deceased have been recorded by the investigating officer on _____________ under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they said they also repeated the statement of the informant in their own words. The typed copies of the statements of the grandmother and cousin brother of the deceased are being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That thereafter on ___________, the statements of the mother and aunt of the deceased, in which they stated that the mental status of the applicant was not well and became short-tempered and when the deceased was crying, the applicant hit but his intention was not for the murder of the deceased. The typed copies of the statements of the mother and aunt of the deceased are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident in any manner. That the applicant was indeed present at his potato field from 11.00 PM of 12.11.2023 for guarding the same against the cattle. That the son of the applicant i.e. deceased was sleeping with his cousin brother Sachin and on the morning of 13.11.2023 around 05.00 AM, suddenly after waking, he ran outside of the house, where he fell and sustained a head injury. That after getting information regarding the accident of his son, he reached his house and went with the deceased for his treatment but unfortunately his son died. That the father of the applicant i.e. the informant went to the concerned police to give information regarding the unfortunate incident. Along with the informant, some villagers, who have enmity with the applicant’s family went with his father and as the informant was an illiterate person, someone wrote the applicant, in which named the applicant for the murder of his 7-year-old son. That the concerned police charge sheet against and the trial has been initiated in which the statements of the P.W. - 1 to 3 have been recorded by the concerned trial court on 22.02.2024, 05.03.2024 and 02.04.2024 respectively, in which they all have told the truth before the court concerned as such they have been declared hostile by the concerned trial court. The photo/typed copy of the statements of the P.W. - 1 to 3 recorded by the trial court are being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely village party bandi, the applicant has been framed in the said 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 shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 304 of IPC at Police Station – Baghauli, District – Hardoi 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 and enemies of 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. That the applicant moved bail application bearing Bail Application No. 700 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Hardoi, and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 27.03.2024 without considering the grounds in his bail application. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 09 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 14.11.2023 without the commission of any offense. That the applicant has no any previous criminal history. 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 the Case Crime No. 402 of 2023 under Section 304 of IPC registered at Police Station – Baghauli, District – Hardoi during the pendency of the case.
I, Nirmla Devi aged about 28 years wife of Basant Lal resident of Bhojpur Ashik, Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Illiterate , Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the wife of the applicant 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 this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case is that a F.I.R. has been lodged on 12.07.2013 against the Sarvesh Kumar under section 363/366/376/506 I.P.C. and Section 9(L) The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 by the mother of victim namely Nirmla Devi. A copy of the F.I.R. dated 12.07.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That it is also relevant to mention here that the F.I.R. has been lodged 19 day delays without proper explanation of delay. That the statement of 161 Cr.P.C. of complainant recorded on 12.07.2013 and in her statement the complainant nothing says about the applicant. A copy of the statement of 161 Cr.P.C. of complainant is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That after the recording of statement of the complainant police recorded the statement of the victim, who is present at her house. A copy of the statement of 161 Cr.P.C. of victim dated 12.07.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the victim sends for medical examination by the police to District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh at 04.05 PM on 13.07.2013 and medical report & supplementary medical report submitted. A copy of the medical report & supplementary medical report are being annexed as Annexure No. 04 collectively to this application. That according to the medical report no external & internal injury seen in body of victim and sexual character is well developed. The radiological age of victim 19 nineteen years. That the statement of 164 Cr.P.C. recorded on 19.07.2013 after seven days of statement of 161 Cr.P.C. of victim in meantime the victim residing with her mother and the statement of victim is well thoughtful against the applicant. A copy of the statement of 164 Cr.P.C. of victim is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the complainant and victim have nothing stated against the applicant in her statements under section 161 Cr.P.C.. But victim has stated in her statement 164 Cr.P.C., the applicant was pressurized to give statement in favour of accused Sarvesh and threatened to life if she can’t give statement in favour of accused Sarvesh. That the accused Sarvesh and victim Lalti Pal are in love since long time. The victim is stated in her statement 164 Cr.P.C., accused Sarvesh give a mobile phone to victim for chatting. That the applicant not named in F.I.R. after investigation, the investigation officer submitted charge sheet against the applicant bearing 196A of 2013 under section 212/120B/363/366/376/506 I.P.C. and Section 9(L) The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station – Lalganj, District –Pratapgarh on 12.08.2013. That the arrested on 12.08.2013 and his bail rejected by the Additional Session Judge, Pratapgarh on 31.08.2013. A copy of the order dated 31.08.2013 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That no any involvement in said case and no any evidence against the applicant. That the applicant is Mausa of accused Sarvesh. That the applicant in jail since 12.08.2013 and has no criminal history. That the applicant is innocent and informant falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime. 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.
I, Jamal aka Jamal Ahmad aged about 46 years son of Girau Shah, resident of Village - Bhagosar (Bhagwatpur), Koyalkhar, Itai, Police Station - Gaura Chauraha, District - Balrampur, Education – Intermediate, 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 21.04.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 58 of 2024 under Sections 363 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Gaura Chauraha, District – Balrampur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 21.04.2024 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 her first information report that on 20.04.2022, the applicant allured her minor daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) and took her away anywhere and she tried her best to find the victim but not find. That on the very same day i.e. on 21.04.2024, the statement of the victim was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she stated that the applicant had given his mobile number and given a life threat to call him. On 20.04.2024, the applicant forcefully brought her and after committing rape, a runaway from the place of incident. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. dated 21.04.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That on 22.04.2024, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the concerned police, in which she 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 22.04.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the medical of the victim was conducted on 22.04.2024 at District Women Hospital, Balrampur by the doctor concerned, in which nothing has been found with regard to the allegations of the opposite party No. 2 and the victim also. Even though, the victim herself stated during her medical that she went with the applicant with her own WILL and had a sexual relationship with her WILL. The photo/ typed copy of the medical report dated 22.04.2024 of the victim is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer added Section 376 (3) of I.P.C., (2)V of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in the aforesaid case crime on 22.04.2024. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court on 24.04.2024, in which the victim almost repeated her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and also tried her best to falsely implicate the applicant in said case for extraneous reasons. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 24.04.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the real story of the case is that the applicant is the common man of the society and has not committed any offense as alleged against him. 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 20.04.2024, the opposite party No. 2 scolded her daughter i.e. the victim thereafter the victim called the applicant to meet. That the applicant met with the victim on 20.04.2024 at the alleged place of the incident, where they were physically active. 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 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 and she went with the applicant with her own free WILL. That without proper investigation of the case, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 363, 376 (3) of I.P.C., 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and 3(2)V of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 04.05.2024 against the applicant. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 04.05.2024 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 since the applicant has not committed any offense 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 in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 880 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Balrampur, and his bail application was rejected by the Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) Act, Balrampur on 16.07.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 16.07.2024 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 25.04.2024 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. 58 of 2024 under Sections 363, 376 (3) of I.P.C., 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and 3(2)V of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered at Police Station – Gaura Chauraha, District – Balrampur, in the interest of justice.
I, Shyam Bahadur Singh aged about 56 years son of Shri Ram Kewal Singh resident of Village - Madhuban, Post - Bansgaon, Police Station - Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar, Religion – Hindu, 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. 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 the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the applicant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. 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 fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against unknown persons on 27.10.2023 at 23.30 hours by Sushant Pandey son of Shri Dilip Pandey resident of Village - Mahuval, Post-Tandwa Maulai, Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar, (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 302, 211 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar regarding incident dated 20.10.2023. The certified typed copy of the first information report dated 27.10.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 27.10.2023 by the informant, on 20.10.2023 the informant found his uncle namely Hemant Pandey (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) dead and his post-mortem was conducted. He also stated that he had doubts that his uncle had been murdered by unknown persons. That the alleged incident which was taken place on 20.10.2023 but the first information report was lodged on 27.10.2023, without giving any explanation with regard to the 7-day 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 inquest report of the deceased body was prepared by the concerned police on 21.10.2023 in the presence of several villagers including the informant and his father. That the body of the deceased was brought for conducting a post-mortem on 21.10.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘Asphyxia & shock due to antemortem strangulation & injury”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 21.10.2023 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 his first informant report. Here it is relevant to mention that the applicant was not named in the first information report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2023 in which the informant almost repeated her first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 30.10.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That first-ever, the police informer named the applicant on 17.11.2023 and stated that on 19.10.2023, the applicant, the deceased and another drank together and after a dispute, the applicant and another murdered the deceased. The typed copy of the endorsement made in CD-15 dated 17.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer has no any concrete evidences and merely on the statement of his informer, obtained the CDR of the applicant and related that the applicant had murdered the deceased. That later on, the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 from his home but for showing his good work, his arrest was shown in a forged and fabricated arresting memo dated 19.11.2023. Another accused was also arrested by the concerned police on the same day. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 19.11.2023 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 applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant and co-accused dated 19.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the other accused were recorded by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 under the life threat, in which he stated that the murder of the deceased was planned by all the accused as the named accused fought with the deceased on 13.10.2023. However, the applicant was reached at the time of the commission of the alleged offense. That the confessional statements of the arrested co-accused and applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 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 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 investigating officer further prepared a false recovery memo on 19.11.2023 by which recovered the murder weapon and a broken mobile phone on pointing of the applicant and another accused. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 19.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That on the basis of such a story, which was narrated by the investigating officer himself, without proper investigation of the case crime, submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and another accused bearing charge sheet No. 521 of 2023 on 3.11.2023. That the real story is that the applicant has no concern with the alleged offense and he has been falsely implicated by the informant due to false and incorrect facts merely on presumption. That it is true that the deceased and applicant were known to each other and on several occasions they have drunk together. That the deceased was not a good person, even though after taking liquor, he started misbehaving & abusing to anyone and also had criminal records due to which he had several enemies, who wanted to kill her, it was admitted by the deceased himself, when he was last time met with the applicant. That on 19.10.2023, the deceased was fully drunk and as per his nature, in the drunken stage, the deceased fought someone and was murdered by anonymous persons but due to an old relation with the deceased, he has been falsely implicated in the said case crime. 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 302, 211 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 19.11.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the abovementioned case, as per the best knowledge of the applicant, he has no criminal history. That the deceased was himself a criminal and had several enemies, however, as per the best knowledge of the applicant, against the deceased below mentioned cases were lodged:- Case Crime No. 355 of 2020 lodged under Sections 302, 201 of I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) of S. C. & S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment, 2005) registered at Police Station - Baskhari, District - Ambedkar Nagar, in which the charge sheet No. 316 of 2020 filed against the deceased and others on 13.12.2020. Case Crime No. 148 of 2023 lodged under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar. The photocopies of the first information report and charge sheet in which the deceased the named are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail application No. 3631 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Ambedkar Nagar and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 02.02.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. 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 be 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. 608 of 2023 under Sections 302, 211 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar, in the interest of justice.
I, Shankar Lal Sah aged about 60 years son of Shri Jeeta Sah resident of Ward No. 15, Subhash Nagar, Kasba, Purnia, Kasba, Bihar, Education – Post Graduate, Occupation – Private Job, 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 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 the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the applicant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. 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 fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 01.01.2024 at 23.20 hours by Piyush Sharma, Office Assistant, Prathama U.P. Gramin Bank, Branch - Itairampur, Gaindas Bujurg, Balrampur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Section 409 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Gaindas Bujurg, District – Balrampur regarding incident dated 30.12.2023. The certified typed copy of the first information report dated 01.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that being the Branch Manager of the Bank, the applicant did not come to the bank on 01.01.2024 without prior information. The mobile of the applicant was switched off and his house was also locked. The informant informed the regional office that on 30.12.2023, there was a delay in closing the cash due to the solar of the branch going off. After matching the cash and getting the Cash Balance Book signed, the applicant took the second key of the cash himself and asked the informant to leave saying that a recovery has to come in a loan account and said he will close the cash. On 01.01.2024, in front of the staff of the Regional Office, the cash was opened with the duplicate keys received from another branch and when the cash was counted, it was found that there was Rs. 18,47,500/- and the informant alleged that the said amount has been taken by the applicant. That the alleged incident which was taken place on 30.12.2023 but the first information report was lodged on 01.01.2024, without giving any explanation with regard to the 2 days 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 here it is relevant to mention that the allegations levelled against the applicant are false and incorrect as the applicant has not been involved in an offense alleged by the informant. That the informant lodged the first information report on the basis of a false and incorrect fact and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by her in his first informant report. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 03.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version. However, the applicant has not committed any offense as stated by him. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 03.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded the further statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 08.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version with improved facts to build his case against the applicant while the applicant has not committed any offense as stated in the first information report. The typed copy of the further statement of the informant dated 08.01.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant was arrested on 10.01.2024 by the concerned police and the confessional statement of the applicant was written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 11.01.2024 as per his wish and as narrated by the bank officials, by which he 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 committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 11.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 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 statement given by the applicant. That on 12.01.2024, the further statement of the applicant was recorded by the concerned police, and in furtherance of the same, a forged and fabricated recovery memo was prepared on 18.01.2024 by which the several keys of the bank were recovered by the concerned police. The photocopy of the further statement of the applicant dated 12.01.2024 and the recovery memo dated 18.01.2024 are being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the statement of the Guard namely Luddur Prasad, who was on duty on 30.12.2023 was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 26.02.2024, in which he stated that the bank was not opened on the night of 30.12.2023. The typed copy of the statement of the guard on duty dated 26.02.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer again recorded the second further statement of the informant on 13.03.2024, in which the informant again tried to improve his prosecution story and tried to fill the loopholes of allegations. However, when the Investigation Officer asked the questions from the informant, he gave doubtful answers to him. The typed copy of the second further statement of the informant dated 13.03.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer also recorded the second further statement of the applicant on 13.03.2024, in which he asked certain questions, which were replied by the applicant and nothing was found by the Investigating Officer against the applicant. The typed copy of the second further statement of the applicant dated 13.03.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 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 so far allegations regarding the taking of the key of the locker from the informant, it is relevant to mention that as per GAD Circular 02/2020 dated 15.01.2020, a written record of the bank keys is to be maintained and in the bank records, there is no record that the petitioner kept the key from the informant. The photocopy of the GAD Circular dated 15.01.2020 of the concerned bank is being annexed as Annexure No. 09 to this affidavit. That it was also mentioned in the confessional statement of the applicant, that he has taken money several times from the bank, if it was true then the money was always found less on counting of the same. That here it is also relevant to mention that when the applicant being the Manager of the bank already had a key, then there is no need to take another key from the informant or other person. That in the statement of the applicant, it has been also written by the Investigating Officer that the applicant stole money for the marriage of his sister while the marriage of the applicant’s sister was solemnized on 06.06.2014. The photocopy of the marriage card of the applicant’s sister's marriage is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That here it is also relevant to mention that nothing was recovered from the possession of the applicant and also the applicant has not taken any loan, which is pending for repayment as mentioned in the statement. That on the basis of such a story, which was narrated by the investigating officer himself, without proper investigation of the case crime, submitted the charge sheet against the applicant bearing charge sheet on 06.04.2024. That the real story is that the applicant has no concern with the alleged offense and he has been falsely implicated by the informant due to false and incorrect facts merely on presumption. That the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime by the informant due to office politics as he was very strict with the employees with regard to their work performance. That the wife of the applicant left him due to which he was in deep mental trauma as such he was absent from bank duty without any prior information and due to which the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said case crime while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the stolen money in any manner as alleged by the informant as well as 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 Section 409 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Gaindas Bujurg, District – Balrampur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has been in jail since 11.01.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the abovementioned case, as per the best knowledge of the applicant, he has no criminal history. That the applicant moved bail application No. 3631 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 03.02.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 03.02.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. 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 be 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. 01 of 2024 under Section 409 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Gaindas Bujurg, District – Balrampur, in the interest of justice.
I, Shyam Bahadur Singh aged about 56 years son of Shri Ram Kewal Singh resident of Village - Madhuban, Post - Bansgaon, Police Station - Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar, Religion – Hindu, 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. 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 the deponent further declared that the contents of the bail application have been explained by the counsel of the applicant in Hindi and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed as under. 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 fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against unknown persons on 27.10.2023 at 23.30 hours by Sushant Pandey son of Shri Dilip Pandey resident of Village - Mahuval, Post-Tandwa Maulai, Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar, (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 302, 211 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar regarding incident dated 20.10.2023. The certified typed copy of the first information report dated 27.10.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 27.10.2023 by the informant, on 20.10.2023 the informant found his uncle namely Hemant Pandey (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) dead and his post-mortem was conducted. He also stated that he had doubts that his uncle had been murdered by unknown persons. That the alleged incident which was taken place on 20.10.2023 but the first information report was lodged on 27.10.2023, without giving any explanation with regard to the 7-day 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 inquest report of the deceased body was prepared by the concerned police on 21.10.2023 in the presence of several villagers including the informant and his father. That the body of the deceased was brought for conducting a post-mortem on 21.10.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘Asphyxia & shock due to antemortem strangulation & injury”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 21.10.2023 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 his first informant report. Here it is relevant to mention that the applicant was not named in the first information report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2023 in which the informant almost repeated her first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 30.10.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That first-ever, the police informer named the applicant on 17.11.2023 and stated that on 19.10.2023, the applicant, the deceased and another drank together and after a dispute, the applicant and another murdered the deceased. The typed copy of the endorsement made in CD-15 dated 17.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer has no any concrete evidences and merely on the statement of his informer, obtained the CDR of the applicant and related that the applicant had murdered the deceased. That later on, the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 from his home but for showing his good work, his arrest was shown in a forged and fabricated arresting memo dated 19.11.2023. Another accused was also arrested by the concerned police on the same day. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 19.11.2023 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 applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant and co-accused dated 19.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the other accused were recorded by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 under the life threat, in which he stated that the murder of the deceased was planned by all the accused as the named accused fought with the deceased on 13.10.2023. However, the applicant was reached at the time of the commission of the alleged offense. That the confessional statements of the arrested co-accused and applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 19.11.2023 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 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 investigating officer further prepared a false recovery memo on 19.11.2023 by which recovered the murder weapon and a broken mobile phone on pointing of the applicant and another accused. The photo/typed copy of the recovery memo dated 19.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That on the basis of such a story, which was narrated by the investigating officer himself, without proper investigation of the case crime, submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and another accused bearing charge sheet No. 521 of 2023 on 3.11.2023. That the real story is that the applicant has no concern with the alleged offense and he has been falsely implicated by the informant due to false and incorrect facts merely on presumption. That it is true that the deceased and applicant were known to each other and on several occasions they have drunk together. That the deceased was not a good person, even though after taking liquor, he started misbehaving & abusing to anyone and also had criminal records due to which he had several enemies, who wanted to kill her, it was admitted by the deceased himself, when he was last time met with the applicant. That on 19.10.2023, the deceased was fully drunk and as per his nature, in the drunken stage, the deceased fought someone and was murdered by anonymous persons but due to an old relation with the deceased, he has been falsely implicated in the said case crime. 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 302, 211 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is in jail since 19.11.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the abovementioned case, as per the best knowledge of the applicant, he has no criminal history. That the deceased was himself a criminal and had several enemies, however, as per the best knowledge of the applicant, against the deceased below mentioned cases were lodged:- Case Crime No. 355 of 2020 lodged under Sections 302, 201 of I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) of S. C. & S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment, 2005) registered at Police Station - Baskhari, District - Ambedkar Nagar, in which the charge sheet No. 316 of 2020 filed against the deceased and others on 13.12.2020. Case Crime No. 148 of 2023 lodged under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar. The photocopies of the first information report and charge sheet in which the deceased the named are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail application No. 3631 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Ambedkar Nagar and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 02.02.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. 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 be 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. 608 of 2023 under Sections 302, 211 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Akbarpur, District – Ambedkar Nagar, in the interest of justice.
I, Ram Bahadur Tripathi aged about 52 years son of Shri Ram Bujhawan resident of Village – Beerpur, Mathura, District - Balrampur, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – ___________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the friend/ 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 was lodged against the unknown persons on 21.09.2022 at 15.10 hours by Smt. Rekha Devi, Principal, Balrampur Balika Inter College, Balrampur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 266 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Balrampur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 21.09.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the first information report lodged by the informant against the applicant on 21.09.2022 on baseless and incorrect facts and grounds stating therein that the applicant applied for the vacant post of assistant teacher (Urdu) and she was selected on the said post and in pursuant to the appointment order dated 22.11.2021, joined on a very same day. The authority concerned received a verification report dated 11.07.2022 for B.Ed. certificate of the applicant from Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal, it was stated therein that the certificate of the applicant was fake and thereafter the first information report was lodged against the applicant That here it is relevant to mention that the allegations levelled against the applicant are false and incorrect as the applicant has not been involved in an offense alleged by the informant. That the informant lodged the first information report on the basis of a false and incorrect fact and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by her in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2022 in which the informant repeated her first information report version. However, the applicant has not committed any offense as stated by her. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 30.10.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been implicated in the instant case by the informant herself due to conspiracy of the office polictic. That the real story is that the applicant’s father died in the year 1991 and anyhow she completed her education by doing work and she is a good schooler. The photocopies of the educational documents of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the applicant pursued her B.Ed. from Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal and passed in the year 2015 and presently after getting permission from the authority concerned she is pursuing her Ph.D. in Sociology. That the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Prayagraj issued an advertisement for the appointment of Assistant Teachers and the online application process started on 16.03.2021. That according to the said advertisement, the requisite qualification for the post of assistant teacher (Urdu) was B.A. (Urdu) & L.T. or B.T. or B.Ed. or another equivalent or degree or diploma. That the applicant has the requisite qualifications for the post hence she applied and after examination, the applicant was declared selected. That the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur vide its order dated 11.11.2021 directed the Manager, Balrampur Balika Inter College, Balrampur to issue the appointment letter to the applicant. The photocopy of the order dated 11.11.2021 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That thereafter, the Authorized Controller, Balrampur Balika Inter College, Balrampur issued an appointment letter to the applicant on 22.11.2021 and in pursuant to the same, the applicant joined on the very same day in the school on the post of assistant teacher (Urdu). The photocopy of the appointment letter dated 22.11.2021 and joining letter are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the applicant was initially appointed to the post in question on probation for one year. That after her appointment, the applicant has been continuing in service since then without any complaint to the full satisfaction of the higher authorities. The work and conduct of the applicant have always been found to be satisfactory by the superior officer of the department without any complaint from any corner. That thereafter as per standard procedure, the educational documents of the applicant were sent to the concerned Universities for verification and on 11.07.2022, the Principal, Balrampur Balika Inter College, Balrampur received a verification report from Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal, in which it has been stated the applicant’s certificate is fake. The photocopy of the verification report dated 11.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That later on, vide letter dated 22.08.2022, the Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal sent another verification dated 22.08.2022 stating therein that the verification report dated 11.07.2022 has not been issued by the University and the certificate of the applicant is found correct. The photocopy of the verification report dated 22.08.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That after another communication with the Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal, the District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur was informed that the verification report dated 22.08.2022 is also fake and fabricated. That the applicant applied for her B.Ed. from Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal through one Amar Kumar Singh along with several students. That after completing the same, the applicant has annexed the same at the time of selection to the post in question however, the appointment of the applicant was not based on her B.Ed. certificate, she was appointed to the post on the basis of Net (U.G.C.) and Urdu Graduation. That the applicant is herself a victim as the middleman of the Didho Kanho Birsa University, Purulia, West Bengal cheated the applicant and now the applicant has come to know that the college, from where the applicant completed her B.Ed. took excess admission as such for grabbing the fee of the lot of students, supplied the forged documents. That the applicant has no concern with the fabrication of the forged document and also she has not used the same with malafide intention to get an appointment to the post in question as such Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. are not applicable upon her. 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 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Balrampur is made out against the applicant. That without proper investigation of the case crime, even after knowing everything with regard to the incident, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant on 17.09.2023, in a very illegal manner. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1262 of 2023 before the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 26.10.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 26.10.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been in jail since 00.00.0000 without committing any offense. That apart from the present case crime, no any 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. 266 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Balrampur, in the interest of justice.
I, Laukush Yadav aged about 27 years son of Shri Ram Naresh resident of Village – Madhwa Nagar Khdar, Kuti Ramtalaha, Police Station - Pachpedawa, District - Balrampur, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – ___________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the husband/ 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 was lodged against the unknown persons on 13.09.2023 at 16.30 hours by the informant/deponent bearing Case Crime No. 328 of 2023 under Section 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Pachpedawa, District – Balrampur. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 13.09.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 13.09.2023 at 9 a.m., the deponent/informant's wife i.e. the applicant fought with him and went with both daughters near Dhadhia Nala on the north side of the village. On getting information, the deponent/informant reached Dhadhia Nala to convince him and was going back home with his elder daughter Roshni. The applicant in the same anger, threw younger daughter Ragini aged about 8 months, into Dhadhia Nala. After a lot of searching in the drain by the informant and other people of the village, Ragine was found lying dead in the drain. That the body of the deceased was brought to the P. M., Balrampur for conducting the post-mortem on 14.09.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘Antimortem drowing”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 14.09.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the deponent/informant lodged the first information report in the heat of the moment, which is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by him in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 13.09.2023 in which the deponent/informant repeated his first information report version. Here it is relevant to mention that the deponent/informant gave his statement when he was angry with the applicant and was not able to think in right manner. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 13.09.2023 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 15.09.2023 and showed that the applicant was arrested by them from far away from home, while the applicant was brought by the concerned police from the house of the deponent/informant for questioning and later on showed her arrest. The typed copy of the arresting/recovery memo dated 15.09.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been implicated in the instant case by the deponent/informant himself due to conspiracy of the village party bandi. That it is also unbelievable a mother would throw her 8-month-old daughter into the canal willfully. That the real story is that there was some conflict among the women at home of the deponent’s family i.e. applicant and her in-laws. The applicant has 8 months baby and has to do all household work and no one used to take the child. That on 13.09.2023, the applicant took her child alone to defecate and started defecating by sitting the child. Meanwhile, she slipped and went into the canal. That the applicant does not know how to swim, yet she tries to save the child by entering the water. On the alarm of the applicant, the people of the village also entered the canal and searched and found the body of the girl. The child died due to drowning. That thereafter the Village Pradhan, who had enmity with the deponent/informant stated to him that his signature was required for the post-mortem of his daughter. That the applicant signed the blank paper and an application for lodging the first information report was moved by the Village Pradhan due to political enmity. That here it is relevant to mention that if the applicant’s child was thrown away by her, she would have sustained injuries in the canal, but there was no injury to the child. That the applicant has no concern with the death of her daughter in any manner and her daughter slipped in the canal. 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 304 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Pachpedawa, District – Balrampur is made out against the applicant. That without proper investigation of the case crime, even after knowing everything with regard to the incident, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant on 24.09.2023, in a very illegal manner. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1186of 2023 before the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 10.10.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 10.10.2023 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant has been in jail since 15.09.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the present case crime, no any 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. 328 of 2023 under Section 304 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Pachpedawa, District – Balrampur, in the interest of justice.
I, Badam Singh aged about 53 years, Son of Shri Kamta Prasad, resident of Village School Ke Paas, Rajgarh, 33Bn PAC, District - Jhansi, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is himself the applicant/accused in the above-referred complaint case and as such is well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case deposed hereunder. That this is the first Bail Application of the applicant in the above-referred criminal case, before this Hon'ble Court. The applicant has not preferred any other Bail Application with regard to the aforesaid criminal Case before this Hon'ble Court or any Higher Court of Law. That the complainant moved a complaint regarding the dishonor of check No. 618158 of Sarva U.P. Gramin Bank, Branch - Jhansi, District - Jhansi amounting to Rs. 1,47,613/-, which was allegedly given to him by the applicant, which has been registered as complaint No. 7736 of 2022. That the brief of the case is that the son of the applicant took a vehicle loan from the complainant amounting to Rs. 1,25,000/- in which the applicant was a guarantor and signed an agreement with the complainant on 26.04.2019. According to the agreement the loan will be repaid through 32 Equated Monthly Installments along with other charges. That the applicant was given a blank and undated cheque No. 618158 against the said loan at the time of processing of the loan as demanded by the complainant, which was as surety of the vehicle loan taken by the applicant’s son. That later on, after failing to pay EMIs by the son of the applicant to the complainant. Therefore the complainant mentioned Rs. 1,47,613/- in the said cheque, and the same was presented to the bank by complainant without any information to the applicant. That the applicant is willing to ready pay the rest amount of the loan, as the applicant has liability for said amount only. That as a matter of fact the complaint of the complainant is based upon misconceived, baseless, and false facts. That the applicant is a respectable member of the society and is ready to furnish adequate and reliable sureties for his release on bail. That the allegation against the applicant is under Section 138 of NI Act, which is bailable offences. That the allegations against the applicant are not of heinous nature and he is not a previous convict. That the informant has further leveled totally absurd allegations against the applicant/accused in the above-referred case on the basis of wrong impression and presumption, which is totally unbelievable. That in view of what has been stated above, it becomes clear that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Place: Lucknow Deponent
I, Fatima Bano aged about 25 years daughter of Mohd. Muslim resident of House No. 103, Purani Divani, Dahilamau, District – Pratapgarh , Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Studding, 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 photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this . No any other bail application 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 unknown persons on 30.10.2015 at 01:30 PM by the informant namely Smt. Kanchan Shukla under section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh as the husband of the informant namely Indramani Shukal (hereinafter referred to as deceased) has murdered by unknown persons on 29.10.2015 about 08.00 PM. The photocopy of the first information report dated 30.10.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That as per first information report, the alleged incident took place on 29.10.2015 about 08:00 P.M. and the first information report was lodged next day i.e. 30.10.2015 about 01:30 PM i.e. after 17:30 hours of the alleged incident without explanation of any delay while the distance between the incident place and police station is only 5 Kilometers and the deceased was famous lawyer of the District Pratapgarh. That according to the first information report on 29.10.2015 about 07:00 PM four came to the home of the deceased and asked from the informant about deceased. Thereafter about 08:15 the milkman of the informant informed her as about 200 miters of the home one injured person was therein in car and car is similar as yours. Then the informant and other residents run to the incident place where they found the deceased was injured. He was brought to the hospital but he was declared as dead. That the post mortem has been conducted on the deceased body on 30.10.2015 about 12.30PM in District Hospital, District – Pratapgarh. Photo/type copies of the post mortem report dated 30.10.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2015 in which the informant repeated the contents of the first information report in another manner but the sole of the first information report has not been changed ever. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 30.10.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. 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 under section 120B IPC. That on 11.11.2015 the informant moved an application before the investigating officer to given information in regard to murder of deceased wherein she alleged against the applicant as being advocate the deceased charged free Rs. 50000/- for bail and due to failure of the obtaining bail order for sons of the applicant, the applicant demanded her money and also threatened for life to deceased. Similar to above application the junior of the deceased namely Tauseef Ahamad also given an application before the investigating officer on 12.11.2015. The photo/type copy of the application dated 11.11.2015 & 12.11.2015 are being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That on basis of the application dated 11.11.2015 of the informant the concerned police recorded her further statement on 12.11.2015 and on basis of the further statement of the informant the Section 120B has been added in said case crime. The type copy of the further statement of the informant is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That in perusal of the further statement of the informant and another application dated 12.11.2015 moved by the junior of the deceased are pre-planned for showing implication of the applicant’s name in the said case crime. That if any life threats given by the applicant as alleged against her then why not deceased and anyone who knows that, not informed to the concerned police before the murder of the deceased. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question with which the applicant has no concerned in any manner. That the name of the applicant came in light in said case crime due undue influence of the local advocates of the District Pratapgarh and the concerned police also showing the good work after false implication of the applicant in the said case crime. That earlier the first information report was registered 4 unknown persons but later on, on the basis of the application dated 11.11.2015 of the informant the applicant has also been made accused in the present case. 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, 120B 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 the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1760 of 2015 before Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 02.12.2015. Certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 02.12.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 14.11.2015. 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, Sanjay Kumar aged about 35 years son of Shri Sant Lal resident of Room No. 11, Matadeen Yadav Chal No. 3, Tanaji Nagar, Kurar Village, Mumbai, Maharastra, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self-employed, 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 a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. 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 brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the applicant and another on 29.05.2024 at 23.49 hours by Sonu Kumar Saroj son of Shri Ram Dulare Saroj resident of Umaraoganj, Lalgopalganj, Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Hathigawan District – Pratapgarh. The certified/typed copy of the first information report dated 29.05.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 29.05.2024 by the informant alleged therein that the marriage of the sister of the informant namely Reena Devi (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) before 8 years ago. On 29.05.2024 due to the love relationship, the applicant, his mother, and sister-in-law (Bhabhi) murdered the deceased. The informant further alleged that the accused persons also beat the deceased for the dowery. That the informant has lodged the first information report only on a presumption basis, while he himself not clear that the applicant and other accused committed the crime as alleged by him. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story and nothing has been done by the applicant as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 30.05.2024 in which the informant gave approximately the same statement as mentioned in the first information report but with improved facts to send the applicant behind bars. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 30.05.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 30.05.2024 in the presence of Panchan as well as the informant. That the body of the deceased was brought for conducting a post-mortem on the very same day i.e. 30.05.2024, where the post-mortem was conducted by the doctor concerned and the cause of death ascertained as ‘anti-mortem head injury’. The photo/ type copy of the post-mortem report dated 30.05.2024 of the deceased is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the some statements of the alleged eyewitnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer on 30.05.2024, in which they all gave all most similar statements and stated that they saw that the applicant was beating the deceased after locking the door of his house from inside. The typed copies of the alleged eyewitnesses dated 30.05.2024 are being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the statements of the alleged eyewitnesses are beyond the imagination as when the door is locked from inside then there was no chance they saw anything, which was happened as alleged by the informant. That meanwhile a forged arresting memo was prepared by the concerned police on 04.06.2024 at around 16.45 PM showing the applicant was arrested when he was trying to abscond. That the confessional statement of the applicant was written/ prepared by the investigating officer on 04.06.2024 tallying with the statements of the informant and other witnesses only to prove the offence against the applicant whereas the applicant has not given any confessional statement. That thereafter, on 04.06.2024 again the Investigating Officer of the case crime, prepared false documents i.e. recovery memo, and showed therein that on pointing of the applicant the murder weapon had been recovered. The typed copy of the recovery memo dated 04.06.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the charge sheet No. 128 of 2024 has been filed by the concerned police against the applicant on 03.08.2024 under Section 302 of I.P.C., in 14 out of 20 witnesses are the factual witnesses. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 04.06.2024 merely on the basis being the husband of the deceased without rhyme and reason, 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 marriage of the applicant and deceased was solemnized around 13 years ago not 8 years as alleged by the informant and the applicant is the father of three minor children and the younger child of the applicant is aged about 3 years. That the applicant is working as a brickfield labour at Bhivandi, Maharastra for the livelihood of his family meanwhile the deceased has an illicit relationship with one Premchandra Yadav. That when the mother of the applicant informed regarding the illicit relationship of the deceased then the applicant returned to his house and tried to convince the deceased for not doing the same, for which, the deceased agreed. That when the applicant again went to resume his work in Maharashtra, the deceased again started chatting with his lover and also called him at the house of the applicant thereafter on 29.05.2024, without any prior information of the deceased, he returned to the home and found that the deceased was chatting with her lover when she saw the applicant, she tried to run away and she sliped from the first floor and sustained injuries. That the applicant with the help of his cousin brother brought the deceased to the hospital, but she died and after getting information, the informant in the heat of the moment and also provocation of some villagers, who had enmity with the applicant, lodged the first information report on the basis of the wrong facts. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely being the husband of the deceased, the applicant has been framed in the said 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 Sections 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh 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 and informant. 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 applicant moved bail application bearing No. 3458 of 2022 before Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 19.09.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 19.09.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 29.05.2024 without the commission of any offense. That the applicant has no any criminal history nor previously been convict. 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 the Case Crime No. 110 of 2024 under Sections 302 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice.
I, Hazifur Rahman son of Arkhul Rahman, resident of Village – Bachhandamau, Police Station – Hathgawan, District – Pratapgarh Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the 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 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 3 named and 3 unnamed persons on 25.02.2016 at 00.15 hours by the informant namely S.O., Police Station – Manikpur, Shri Pramod Kumar Singh under Sections 302, 307, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh with regard to murder of on duty Homeguard Mahadev Prasad (hereinafter referred to as deceased). The alleged incident was took place on 24.02.2016 around 23.30 hours. The photocopy of the first information report dated 25.02.2016 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant is not named in the first information report. According to the first information report lodged on 25.02.2016 by informant, in which he alleged that around 23.30 hours the most wanted criminal of area along with others criminals fired and bombard on the Police Station – Manikpur and run away from incident place. The informant and his companions tried to catch him failed to do so. That the post mortem was conducted at District Hospital, Pratapgarh on 25.02.2016 by the doctor concerned. The cause of death ascertained as “Shock due to coma as a result of Anti-mortem firearm injury”. The photo/typed copy of the post mortem report dated 25.02.2016 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the concerned police arrested the accused of the said case crime namely Shiva alias Shivmani Tiwari and Vikash Mishra and they were given their confessional statement before the concerned police but they have said the name of the applicant. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the accused Shiva alias Shivmani Tiwari is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the concerned police was called the applicant on 26.02.2016 for some queries with regard to incident and falsely implicate him in said crime case for ulterior motive. The concerned police forcefully taken confessional statement of the applicant and on said basis he was in jail. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the concerned police without proper investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge sheet bearing No. 48 of 2016 dated 19.05.2016 against the applicant and 3 others persons. That the real story is this; the applicant is common and law abiding citizen, on 26.02.2016, the applicant was called by the concerned police for the asking about the incident took place at Police Station – Manikpur but he was arrested by the concerned police and concerned police forcefully taken his confessional statement and falsely implicate. The applicant falsely implicate in several cased thereafter. That neither the applicant has motive nor any motive has been assigned to him to commit the crime in question and the motive to commit the crime in question has been assigned by the concerned police. 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 the evidence and same is not reliable in manner so far concerned 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, except his confessional statement, which was taken forcefully by the concerned police and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Section 302, 307, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh 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/concerned police in malafide intention. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 941 of 2017 before Special/ Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 02.08.2017. Certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 02.08.2017 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That two other co-accused of the aforesaid case crime namely Pradeep Kumar Tiwari alias Rohit and Vipin Kumar Pandey, have been released on bail by this Hon'ble Court. The photocopy of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 26.02.2016 without committing any offence. The applicant has not convicted ever before. That after arresting the applicant the concerned police falsely implicate the applicant in several cases as under: Case Crime No. 36 of 2016 under Section 302, 307, 504, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 37 of 2016 under Section 307 IPC, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 38 of 2016 under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 41 of 2016 under Section 307, 504, 506 IPC and 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh. Case Crime No. 22 of 2016 under Section 396, 412 IPC, Police Station – Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh. 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, Brijesh Kumar son of Shri Basudev ageda about 45 years resident of House NO. 4, Village – Bojhi, Police Station – Mandhata, District Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the relative 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 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 the applicant and 8 other persons on 25.01.2014 at 19.00 hours by the informant Ikhlak Ahamad under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 352 I.P.C. at Police Station –Antu, District – Pratapgarh as the brothers of the informant namely Pappu alias Istkhar Ahmad and Anees Ahamad (hereinafter referred to as deceased) have murdered by applicant and 8 other person on 25.01.2014. The photocopy of the first information report dated 25.01.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That as per first information report, the alleged incident took place on 25.01.2014 at 5.00 P.M. and the first information report was lodged on same day at 07.00 P.M. i.e. after 2 hours of the alleged incident, while the distance between the incident place and police station is only 9 Kilometers and the informant was having motorcycle. That according to the first information report the informant was present everywhere i.e. from Chamanganj Bazar, which place the deceased was picked and he was also called his cousin brothers namely Maksood Ahmad and Azaz Ahamd and all three are followed the deceased till incident place but not raised alarm at any point in any manner. That as a matter of record, the first information report was not lodged after two hours of the alleged incident, it has been lodged after much delay of the alleged incident, which is itself clear from perusal of the inquest reports of the deceased persons as in the inquest reports, it is clearly mentioned that the information regarding the death of deceased persons was given at police station on 25.01.2014 at 11.20 P.M. and on 26.01.2014 at 00.35 A.M. by Ward Boy Sita Ram and on the inquest report no case number is mentioned. Photo/type copies of the inquest reports of the deceased persons are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That from perusal of the first information report, it is clear that it had been registered under section 302 I.P.C. about 4 ½ hours prior to the information of the death of deceased persons. The fact itself creates doubt on the genuineness of the first information report. That it is admitted case of the prosecution that neither the complainant nor his cousins (alleged eye witnesses) have received any type of injury in the alleged incident. This fact itself creates doubt on the presence of complainant and his cousins at the place of alleged incident. That the post mortem reports of the deceased persons do not corroborate the prosecution case as in the post mortem report of deceased Anees three injuries have been reported and in the post mortem report of Istikhar alias Pappu, two injuries have been reported, while as per prosecution all the accused persons badly assaulted the deceased persons and further no fire arm injury has been found on the body of deceased persons. Photo/type copies of the post mortem report dated 26.01.2014 are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That a bare perusal of the post mortem reports of deceased persons reveals that deceased persons died due to head injury and the prosecution is silent on this point that who is author of the those fatal injuries. Typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the D.F.O. Anand Kumar Srivastava and Ranger Shiv Shankar Singh, who have been made eye witness of the alleged incident, did not support the prosecution story in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C.. Photocopies of the statements of D.F.O. Anand Kumar Srivastava and Ranger Shiv Shanker Singh recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That neither the applicant has motive nor any motive has been assigned to him to commit the crime in question and the motive to commit the crime in question has been assigned to the co-accused Ram Pratap, with whom the applicant has no concerned in any manner. That the role of the causing injury by danda has been assigned to the applicant and the false recovery of danda has been also shown on his pointing out, while the reality is that nothing has been recovered by the pointing out of the applicant and the alleged recovery of the danda is false & fabricated and planted on, which is itself evident from this very fact that the alleged recovery has been shown from an open place, which is easy approach of every person and further there is no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery. Photo/type copy of the forged recovery memo is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That after perusal of the post mortem report, it’s clear that there is no any gahdala injuries on any deceased persons. That the alleged incident is said to have been taken place in dusky hours of winter evening and no source of light has been disclosed. That earlier the first information report was registered only against 9 persons but later on, during the course of investigation, two persons have also been made accused in the present case. That as a matter of fact, the deceased persons were hardened criminal and they have been murdered due to their criminal activities and later on, after having the knowledge of the death of the his brothers, the informant managed lodging a false first information report against applicant and 8 other persons, with whom he is on inimical terms, by taking the illegal benefits of death of his brothers. 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 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452 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 the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 627 of 2014 before Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 15.07.2014. Certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 15.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That the applicant filed certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 15.07.2014 because free copy of the bail rejection order is being never received. The bail application moved before the court below along with five persons and same is rejected by one order dated 15.07.2014. That the applicant in jail since 06.02.2014. 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, Brijesh Kumar son of Shri Basudev ageda about 45 years resident of House NO. 4, Village – Bojhi, Police Station – Mandhata, District Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Illiterate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the relative 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 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 the applicant and 8 other persons on 25.01.2014 at 19.00 hours by the informant Ikhlak Ahamad under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 352 I.P.C. at Police Station –Antu, District – Pratapgarh as the brothers of the informant namely Pappu alias Istkhar Ahmad and Anees Ahamad (hereinafter referred to as deceased) have murdered by applicant and 8 other person on 25.01.2014. The photocopy of the first information report dated 25.01.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That as per first information report, the alleged incident took place on 25.01.2014 at 5.00 P.M. and the first information report was lodged on same day at 07.00 P.M. i.e. after 2 hours of the alleged incident, while the distance between the incident place and police station is only 9 Kilometers and the informant was having motorcycle. That according to the first information report the informant was present everywhere i.e. from Chamanganj Bazar, which place the deceased was picked and he was also called his cousin brothers namely Maksood Ahmad and Azaz Ahamd and all three are followed the deceased till incident place but not raised alarm at any point in any manner. That as a matter of record, the first information report was not lodged after two hours of the alleged incident, it has been lodged after much delay of the alleged incident, which is itself clear from perusal of the inquest reports of the deceased persons as in the inquest reports, it is clearly mentioned that the information regarding the death of deceased persons was given at police station on 25.01.2014 at 11.20 P.M. and on 26.01.2014 at 00.35 A.M. by Ward Boy Sita Ram and on the inquest report no case number is mentioned. Photo/type copies of the inquest reports of the deceased persons are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That from perusal of the first information report, it is clear that it had been registered under section 302 I.P.C. about 4 ½ hours prior to the information of the death of deceased persons. The fact itself creates doubt on the genuineness of the first information report. That it is admitted case of the prosecution that neither the complainant nor his cousins (alleged eye witnesses) have received any type of injury in the alleged incident. This fact itself creates doubt on the presence of complainant and his cousins at the place of alleged incident. That the post mortem reports of the deceased persons do not corroborate the prosecution case as in the post mortem report of deceased Anees three injuries have been reported and in the post mortem report of Istikhar alias Pappu, two injuries have been reported, while as per prosecution all the accused persons badly assaulted the deceased persons and further no fire arm injury has been found on the body of deceased persons. Photo/type copies of the post mortem report dated 26.01.2014 are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That a bare perusal of the post mortem reports of deceased persons reveals that deceased persons died due to head injury and the prosecution is silent on this point that who is author of the those fatal injuries. Typed copy of the statement of the informant is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the D.F.O. Anand Kumar Srivastava and Ranger Shiv Shankar Singh, who have been made eye witness of the alleged incident, did not support the prosecution story in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C.. Photocopies of the statements of D.F.O. Anand Kumar Srivastava and Ranger Shiv Shanker Singh recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That neither the applicant has motive nor any motive has been assigned to him to commit the crime in question and the motive to commit the crime in question has been assigned to the co-accused Ram Pratap, with whom the applicant has no concerned in any manner. That the role of the causing injury by gahdala has been assigned to the applicant and the false recovery of gahdala has been also shown on his pointing out, while the reality is that nothing has been recovered by the pointing out of the applicant and the alleged recovery of the gahdala is false & fabricated and before the alleged incident i.e. 06.01.2014 and planted on, which is itself evident from this very fact that the alleged recovery has been shown from an open place, which is easy approach of every person and further there is no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery. Photo/type copy of the forged recovery memo is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That after perusal of the post mortem report, it’s clear that there is no any gahdala injuries on any deceased persons. That the alleged incident is said to have been taken place in dusky hours of winter evening and no source of light has been disclosed. That earlier the first information report was registered only against 9 persons but later on, during the course of investigation, two persons have also been made accused in the present case. That as a matter of fact, the deceased persons were hardened criminal and they have been murdered due to their criminal activities and later on, after having the knowledge of the death of the his brothers, the informant managed lodging a false first information report against applicant and 8 other persons, with whom he is on inimical terms, by taking the illegal benefits of death of his brothers. 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 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452 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 the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 627 of 2014 before Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 15.07.2014. Certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 15.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That the applicant filed certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 15.07.2014 because free copy of the bail rejection order is being never received. The bail application moved before the court below along with five persons and same is rejected by one order dated 15.07.2014. That the applicant in jail since 06.02.2014. 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, Narendra Bahadur Singh aged about 45 years son of Shri Anand Bahadur Singh resident of Sarai Khande, Dughvan, Sarai Khande Mu, District - Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self-employed, 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. 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 brief fact of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the unknown person on 08.05.2023 at 06.45 hours by Dilip Kumar Sharma, Sub Inspector, Police Station – Kheron, District - Raebareli resident of Village – Ajgara Raniganj, Police Station – Kheeron, District – Raebareli (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Section 307 of IPC at Police Station – Kheeron District – Raebareli regarding incident dated 16.08.2022. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 10.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 08.05.2023 by the informant alleged therein that on 06.05.2023, when he was patrolling he received information around 09.00 PM that in a Tilakuttasav, an unknown person fired due to which Raju Mishra was shot in the stomach and injured brought to the hospital. That the first information lodged by the informant is delayed about 2 days without giving any explanation of the delay, which creates doubt about the prosecution story. That the informant has lodged the first information report only on a presumption basis, while he himself is not clear that the applicant committed the crime as alleged by him. The informant just said, in his first information report he just came to know that an unknown person fired in a function. That the injured have been brought to the District Hospital, Raebareli, on 06.05.2023 where the injury report has been prepared by the concerned doctor. However, it has not been cleared by the doctor concerned as he stated that the injury was caused by a suspected firearm. The photo/typed copy of the injury report of the injured dated 06.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That after initial treatment of the injured, he was discharged on the very same day i.e. on 06.05.2023 and referred to the Department of Trauma, K.G.M.U, Lucknow. The photocopy of the discharge slip dated 06.05.2023 issued by the District Hospital, Raebareli is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same is depends upon the concocted story and nothing has been done by the applicant as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 08.05.2023 in which the informant has given approximately the same statement as mentioned in the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 08.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That several statements of the witnesses have been recorded by the investigating officer on 08.05.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they said they only heard the gunshot but they don’t know who fired. The typed copies of the statements of the witnesses of the case are being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That on 08.05.2023, the injured died thereafter the wife of the deceased injured moved an application before the Station House Officer, Police Station - Kheeron, District - Raebareli stating therein that her husband was shot on 06.05.2023 in a function and during treatment at K.G.M.U., Lucknow on 08.05.2023 at 09.00 AM and also introduced an eyewitness. The typed copy of the endorsement of the application moved by the wife of the deceased injured on 08.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That on the very same i.e. on 08.05.2023, the statements of the wife of the deceased injured and alleged eyewitness of the case crime, and both have named the applicant in their statement. The typed copies of the wife of the deceased injured and alleged eyewitness of the case crime are being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer after recording the statement of the wife of the deceased injured and alleged eyewitness of the case crime, altered the Section of the Case Crime from Section 307 to 304 of I.P.C. on 08.05.2023 and the investigation of the case crime is still going on. The typed copy of the endorsement of the C.D. No. 2 dated 08.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That after the death of the injured, his dead body was brought for the post-mortem prepared by the doctor concerned on 08.05.2023 in which the cause of death has been ascertained as ‘anti mortem firearm injury’. The photo/typed copy of the post-mortem dated 08.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 09 to this affidavit. That the concerned police arrested the applicant on 10.05.2023 from his house showing his arrest far from his house for extraneous reasons and also recovered the gun used in said alleged incident. The typed copy of the arresting-cum-recovery memo dated 10.05.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident in any manner. That the applicant was indeed present at the function on 06.05.2023 and holding the firearm of one of his family members at that moment someone opened fire in the air, which injured a person. That the applicant had not been fired but he hold a firearm at the said function therefore after the death of the injured, his wife named the applicant along with an eyewitness. That till date the ballistic report has not been received by the concerned police to show that the applicant had fired on 06.05.2023 as alleged against him. That the wife of the deceased injured and alleged eyewitness of the case crime named the applicant in their statements merely on the basis of hearsay evidence, while the applicant has no concern with the said incident. That here it is relevant to mention that the informant has well aware that the injured is under treatment but he had not tried to record any statement of the injured. That nothing has been recovered from the applicant by the concerned police in relation to the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 10.05.2023 merely on the basis of false, incorrect and wrong statements of the wife of the deceased injured and alleged eyewitness of the case crime without rhyme and reason, while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely friend of another accused, the applicant, and other accused of the crime, the applicant has been framed in the said 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 Section 304 of IPC at Police Station – Kheeron, District – Raebareli is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police and informant. 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 the applicant moved bail application bearing Bail Application No. 1971 of 2023 before Sessions Judge, Raebareli, and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 07.06.2023 without considering the grounds in his bail application. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 07.06.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 10.05.2023 without the commission of any offense. That the applicant has no any previous criminal history. 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 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 the Case Crime No. 201 of 2023 under Section 304 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kheeron, District – Raebareli during the pendency of the case.
I, Mohd. Islam aged about 35 years son of Mohd. Rafi resident of Village – Lawana, Police Station - Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Band Master, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the 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 31.07.2014 on 14.30 hours by the father of the deceased namely Mohd. Arman, under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act on the basis of wrong facts, the incident took place on 26.07.2014. The photocopy of the first information report dated 31.07.2014 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 Shaziya Bano was solemnized with applicant on 23.02.2014 in group marriage in District – Pratapgarh without dowry. Just after marriage, the applicant and his family member was demanding dowry and when the demand of the applicant and his family member has not fulfilled in result of that they brutally murdered his daughter. That some spot witnesses namely Ayodhya Prasad Maurya and others given statement before the investigating officer as on 26.07.2014 near about 3.00 PM deceased quarreled with the applicant for leaving the family member of the applicant and wants to settle with the applicant in Mumbai, where the applicant residing for the livelihood of his family. Just after quarrel the deceased enter her room and locked from inside. When the deceased raised alarm for saving her life then the applicant and some other villagers tried to open the door but door was locked from inside. Thereafter the applicant enters the room from the back side of the home by using stair and opens the door from inside, where the deceased was burning and the applicant brought the deceased hospital for medication. The type copy of the statements of spot witnesses of the case is being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That after opening the door the applicant called the Ambulance by the helpline No. 108 and brings the deceased with family members to SRN Hospital, Allahabad for treatment and admitted in hospital at 07.25 PM. The photocopy of the hospital admission slip dated 27.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police on 27.07.2014 before the presence of ACM, Sushila at SRN Hospital, Mortuary, Allahabad and the Panchat are as under: 1. Mohd. Arman son of Mohd. Nasir resident of Pateullapur, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh, 2. Mohd. Murtaza son of Mustafa resident of Gaura, Police Station – Sorawan, District- Allahabad, 3. Mohd. Junaid son of Mohd. Arman resident of Pateullapur, Police Station – Manikpur, District – Pratapgarh 4. Aasheen son of Mohd. Safiq resident of Village – Lawana, Police Station - Nawabganj, District – Pratapgarh 5. Mohd. Islam son of Ali Hasan resident of Varista, Police Station – Jethwara, District – Pratapgarh The type copy of the inquest report dated 27.07.2014 prepared by the investigating officer is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the post mortem was done on body of the deceased on 27.07.2014 in MLN, Hospital, Allahabad at 4.00 PM. The photocopy of the post mortem report dated 27.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the investigating officer on 31.07.2014 wherein the informant repeated the version of his first information report. The type copy of the statement of informant dated 31.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant belongs to very poor family and has bearing Antyoday Ration Card but the informant alleged the applicant and his family demanded one Motorcycle and Rs. 1,00,000/- same is unbelievable. The photocopy of the Antyoday Ration Card is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That charge sheet filed by the investigation officer on 06.11.2014 against only applicant including under section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 The Dowry Prohibition Act. That the applicant has been arrested by the police on 20.08.2014 and moved the bail application before the court concerned and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 31.01.2015. The copy of the order dated 31.01.2015 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 08 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 20.08.2014 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 living in Mumbai for the survival/livelihood of his family members but the deceased always pressurized him to bring her to Mumbai 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 Mumbai. That on date of incident i.e. 26.07.2014, the deceased was start quarreling with applicant near about 01.00 PM and suddenly about 03.00 PM 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 and both are very happy 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, Suraj Kumar Singh aged about 18 years son of Hemant Singh resident of Dahilamau, Police Station – Kotawali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Perusing B.Sc. II year , do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the real brother of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant for doing pairvi of the case/ 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 the applicant and one another & two unmanned persons on 31.07.2014 at 17.30 hours by the informant Ghanshyam Rawat under Section 452, 323, 504, 506, 354B I.P.C. and under Section 7/8 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh. The photocopy of the first information report dated 31.07.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That as per first information report, the alleged incident took place on 31.07.2014 at 01.00 P.M. as the applicant with other accused on 31.07.2014, when the daughter of the informant namely Ku. Rajni came back from her school, the accused persons beaten the daughter of the informant and also abusing to her. That the real incident is that, being resident of same locality of the accused and the informant, the daughter of the informant and accused/ applicant quarreled for passing the cycle on the road, when the victim returning home from her school. That thereafter informant become annoyed and decided to punished the accused person and for that purpose the informant putting the gravity of the case lodged the said first information report on the false ground and reason. That from perusal of the first information report, it is clear that the Section 7/8 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is not made against the applicant as the nothing was alleged and mentioned in first information report and as well as statement of the victim, which is essential element of the Section 7 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The fact itself creates doubt on the genuineness of the first information report. The type of the statement of the victim is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the medical of the victim done at District Hospital, Pratapgarh on 31.07.2014 and as per medical report the one injury shown which is simple in nature. The photo/ type copy of the medical report dated 31.07.2014 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 31.07.2014 and also alleged eyewitnesses therein all repeat the first information report, nothing has been changed in their statements. The type copies of the informant and alleged eyewitness are being annexed collectively as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That alleged eyewitness produced by the informant are not really eyewitnesses as the said incident not took place, they are well managed produced by the informant. That a minor quarreled between the victim and accused but due to ego of the informant, he cooked false incident and implicate the applicant. That the alleged incident is said to have been taken place in broad day and it is also impossible to the applicant to tried as alleged by the informant. 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 452, 323, 504, 506, 354B I.P.C. and under Section 7/8 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is made out against the applicant. That the applicant is student and belongs to respected family of the society also and due to ego of the informant he falsely implicated in the said 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 in malafide intention. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1528 of 2015 before Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 1, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 18.09.2015. Certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 18.09.2015 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 14.09.2015. 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, Ikrar Ahmad aged about 41 years son of Tajmmul Khan resident of Behsa, P/O 32 Bataliyan, Behsa, District – Lucknow, Religion – Muslim, Occupation – Private Job, Education – Literate, do hereby solemnly affirm and states on oath as under :- That the deponent is Mama of the applicant and doing pairvi of 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 of the deponent is pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail of the applicant filed before this Hon’ble Court and no other bail application on same cause of action is filed or pending in any court of law. That on 27.09.2018 at about 21.29 Hours, the informant Shri Ravindra Srivastava, Station House Officer, Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh lodged a first information report against 3 persons including the applicant at Case Crime No. 380 of 2020 under section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to ‘Gangster Act’) in Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh. The certified and typed copy of the first information report dated 27.09.2018 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That brief fact of the alleged prosecution story is that the applicant is the gang leader of a gang, who is committing the offences in an 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, Pratapgarh on 17.09.2018. The photocopy of the gang chart approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh 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 the informant in order to show his good and hard work, falsely implicated the applicant in several case crimes, which are pending before him, and thereafter finally lodged the said first information report dated 27.09.2018 under Section 2/3 of Gangster Act, The two cases mentioned in the gang chart are as below:- Case Crime No. 135 of 2018 under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 218 of 2019 under Sections 394, 307, 302, 120B of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 63 of 2018 under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 64 of 2018 under Sections 307, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 68 of 2018 under Sections 3/25 Arms Act registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 380 of 2018 under Sections 2/3 of Gangster Act registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, which is the present case, in which the bail application is moved. Case Crime No. 439 of 2017 under Sections 302, 392 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 467 of 2017 under Sections 323, 392 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below. Case Crime No. 267 of 2007 under Sections 323, 392 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, so far relates this case, this case is intentionally mentioned in the gang charge as the application was just about 7 years old, which the said case lodged. The photocopies of Bail orders passed by the court concerned are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant is neither member of the alleged gang as alleged in the first information report nor involved in any crime as alleged against him in the gang chart by the informant. He further does not commit any offence for his economical and physical benefit due to which the local area people are under threat as such allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated. The police for showing their good work falsely implicated the applicant in the said case crime. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has a good reputation. That the applicant is in jail since ____________ without committing any offence as alleged against him. That the applicant does not commit 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 since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged, hence no offence under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 relating to Police Station – Raniganj, District – Pratapgarh, is made against him. That the applicant had moved his bail application bearing number 2164 of 2019 before the Additional Session judge/Special Judge (Gangster), Room No. 5, Pratapgarh and same has been rejected on 17.01.2020. The free copy of the order dated 17.01.2020 misplaced by the deponent hence the certified copy of the order is annexed. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 17.01.2020 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That the applicant is previously not convicted by any court of law. 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 not 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 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 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, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial.
I, Rajeev Kumar Singh aged about 50 years son of Shri Jagdeesh Singh resident of Village – Dalpatpur, Post – Dalpatpur Uparhar, District - Ayodhya, Education – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the maternal uncle (Mama)/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 photo affidavit slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association, Lucknow 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 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 this is the first bail of the applicant filed before this Hon’ble Court and no other bail application on same cause of action is filed or pending in any court of law. That on 18.05.2024 at about 21.11 Hours, the informant Shri Ratan Kumar Sharma, Station House Officer, Police Station – Purakalandar, District – Ayodhya lodged a first information report against 6 persons including the applicant at Case Crime No. 163 of 2024 under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to ‘Gangster Act’) in Police Station – Purakalandar, District – Ayodhya. The certified and typed copy of the first information report dated 18.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That brief fact of the alleged prosecution story is that the applicant is a member of a gang, whose leader is Abhishek Singh alias Sarvan Singh, who is committing the offences in an organized manner regularly along with others gang member including its leader and 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 18.05.2024. The photocopy of the gang chart approved by the District Magistrate, Ayodhya on 18.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That during the preparation of the gang chart by the authority concerned and approval of the same, no one followed the Standard Operating Procedure and Rules, 2021 for preparation and approval of the gang chart. That the gang chart dated 18.05.2024 was not prepared and proposed by initially by the Station House Officer, Police Station - Purakalandar, District - Ayodhya and forwarded to the first approving authority i.e. Circle Officer. That as per Rules, 2011 the Circle Officer forwarded the proposed gang chart to the Additional Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police along with relevant papers but on bare perusal of the gang chart, it was not prepared and proposed by the Station House Officer, Police Station - Purakalandar, District - Ayodhya and same has been prepared and proposed by the Circle Officer himself. That at the time of approval of the gang chart against the applicant, the authorities violated the guidelines/ law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Hon'ble High Court as well as Rules, 2021, by which the gang chart forwarding officer, at time of approval of the gang chart, written his comments by his own handwriting but here in this case, the forwarding officer comments were already printed on the gang chart and only initial has been put on the gang chart by the authority concerned. That here it is also relevant to mention that the entire gang chart, along with comments of the C.O., Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya, and District Magistrate, Ayodhya has been typed prior to approval of the same, which shows that the authorities have prejudice against the applicant. That no any approving authority applied its mind or gone through the papers prior to approving the gang chart hence the gang chart dated 18.05.2024 is null and void ab-initio. 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 the informant in order to show his good and hard work, falsely implicated the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, Only one case is mentioned in the gang chart, which is as below:- Case Crime No. 522 of 2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 308, 506, 34, 120-B of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Purakalandar, District – Ayodhya, in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 30.09.2024. The photocopy of the order dated 30.09.2024 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant is neither member of the alleged gang as alleged in the first information report nor involved in any crime as alleged against him in the gang chart by the informant. He further does not commit any offence for his economical and physical benefit due to which the local area people are under threat as such allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated. That the applicant is in jail since 07.12.2023 in connection with another case mentioned hereinabove and the concerned police taken remand in the present case crime on 19.05.2024, since then he is jail in present case. That the real fact is that the applicant is innocent and belongs to a respected family and has a good reputation. That the concerned police for showing their good work falsely implicated the applicant in the said case crime. That the applicant is in jail since 07.12.2023 without committing any offence as alleged against him. That the applicant does not commit 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 since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged, hence no offence under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 relating to Police Station – Purakalandar, District – Ayodhya, is made against him. That the applicant had moved his bail application bearing number 1967 of 2024 before the Special Judge, Gangster Act/ Additional Session Judge, Fifth, Ayodhya and same has been rejected on 25.09.2024. The free copy of the bail rejection order dated 25.09.2024 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That the applicant is previously not convicted by any court of law. Apart from abovementioned there is no other criminal history against the applicant. 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 not 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 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 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, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial.
I, Shiv Pujan aged about 57 years son of Late Dubari Prasad resident of 542, Devkali Karanpur, Post – Pure Narshing Bhan, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District - Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Government Servant, 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 the brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the four unknown person on 26.09.2023 at 22.16 hours by Rajendra Kumar Tiwari son of Shri Shambhu Nath Tiwari resident of Meera Bhawan, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 323, 394 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh. The certified/typed copy of the first information report dated 26.09.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 26.09.2023 by the informant alleged that on 26.09.2023 at about 01.30 A.M. four persons came in a car without number plate and started beating him. The informant further stated that the police persons (Chetah Mobile Police) were present and record the incident and after his initial treatment then he found the 4-5 thousand has been looted. That on perusal of the first information report, it was very strange that the police personnel (Chetah Mobile Police) were there but they have not tried to stop the incident and just watched the entire alleged incident. That the informant was brought to the District Hospital, Pratapgarh for treatment on 26.09.2023, where he was medically examined and the injury of the informant was found simple in nature. The photo/typed copy of the injury report dated 26.09.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report he was brought to the hospital by the police personnel just after alleged incident while his medical was prepared on 26.09.2023 at 04.00 P.M. and first information report lodged at 10.16 P.M.. That the informant has lodged the first information report only on a presumption basis, while the applicant has no concern with the said alleged incident. That on 27.09.2023, the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. which is contrary to the first information report lodged by him. The informant stated that he has moved application for lodging first information report on next day of alleged incident while the informant moved application on very same of the alleged incident i.e. 26.09.2023. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 27.09.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the informant further stated in his statement that when the Chetah Mobile Police came at spot then the accused persons runaway from the place of occurance. That on 28.09.2023, a forged, false and fabricated recovery cum arresting memo has been prepared by the concerned police in which shown recovery of Rs. 1000.00 from the applicant and also recorded the confession of the applicant under the life threat, given by the concerned police, when he was arrested. The photo/typed copy of the recovery cum arresting memo dated 28.09.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the applicant was arrested from his house by the concerned police on 28.09.2023 around 08.00 A.M. and later on his fake and fabricated arresting memo has been prepared by them. That after the arrest of the applicant, on 02.10.2023 the further statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police in which he named the applicant and other accused. The typed copy of the further statement of the informant dated 02.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the informant in his further statement stated that as “vkW[k esa pksV yxus ds dkj.k mu O;fDr;ksa ds ckjs esa tku ugha ik;k Fkk” but later on, strangly he identify the applicant and others with their name and addresses. That the Investigating Officer, without proper investigation of the case crime, ignoring the truth of the case, a charge sheet No. 586 of 2023 has been filed by the concerned police against the applicant and 2 others on 29.10.2023 under Sections, 394, 412 of I.P.C.. That the real fact of the case crime is that the applicant has no concerns with the alleged incident as stated by the informant of the case crime. That on 26.09.2023, the applicant was returning from a function with his friends and stopped the shop of the informant for a tea break. That when the applicant and other were present at that place, which is nearby the Bus Stand, there was crowd and some dispute was arisen between the informant and some unknow person and after few minutes, they started beaten the informant. That later on, the applicant was arrested from his house by the concerned police and named in the connection to the aforesaid case crime. That the applicant is in jail 28.09.2023 without rhyme and reason, while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That neither the applicant has any 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 show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 394, 412 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police and informant. 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 the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 2912 of 2023 before Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 08.11.2023. Free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 08.11.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 28.09.2023 without the commission of any offense & no any previous criminal history. 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. 644 of 2023 under Sections 363, 342 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice.
I, Samim aged about 58 years son of Jamilakhan, 143, Bhonka, District - Gonda, District - Gonda, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – Self-employed, 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 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 the brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the unknown person on 19.03.2020 at 13.10 hours by Smt. Raj Kumari wife of Shri Devi Prasad Singh resident of Village – Lauhangpur Deeha, Police Station – Paraspur, District – Gonda (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) under Sections 363 of IPC at Police Station – Paraspur District – Gonda regarding incident dated 18.03.2020. The certified/typed copy of the first information report dated 19.03.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 19.03.2020 by the informant alleged that on 18.03.2020 at about 12.00 P.M. her daughter/victim aged about 14 years old, went outside of her house but late evening when she did not return to her house, then the informant searched her neighborhood and relatives and when no information was gathered about victim then she lodged the first information report. That the first information lodged by the informant was delayed about 25 hours without giving any explanation of the delay, which created doubt about the prosecution story. That the informant has lodged the first information report only on a presumption basis, while the applicant has no concern with the said alleged incident. That on 21.03.2020, the victim returned to her home thereafter, the informant informed the concerned Police Station regarding the arrival of the victim on 23.03.2020. On said date, the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in which she repeated her version of the first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 23.03.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the concerned police recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. on 31.0 in which she stated that when she went to the mustered field, an unknown person tried to catch him then she ran away to the canal, where a person was present and she asked him to help her and drop her to her house then the said person brought her to his house, where she stayed for 4 days. The typed copy of the statement of the victim dated 31.03.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the medical of the victim was conducted on 26.05.2020 at District Women Hospital, Gonda, and the age of the victim was ascertained as 18 to 19 years by the doctor. The photo/typed copy of the medical dated 26.05.2020 and age determination certificate dated 28.05.2020 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the endorsement of the age determination of the victim has been endorsed in the CD-6 dated 29.03.2020 and the statement of the doctor concerned has been recorded on 24.06.2020, in which she stated that the rape has not been committed with the victim. The typed copy of CD-6 dated 29.03.2020 and the statement of the doctor dated 24.06.2020 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That on 02.06.2020, the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded by the concerned court, in which she changed her earlier statement and built a new story, to falsely implicate the applicant under the influence of her mother and some other persons. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That on the basis of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. the name of accused Daddan, the applicant, Harinath Dubey and Nageshwar have come to light, and as the victim stated that Daddan and the applicant committed rape with her, therefore, Sections 376, 342, 120-B of IPC and Section 3, 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 added in said case crime. The investigating officer also opined that the incident is doubtful. The typed copy of the findings of the Investigating Officer dated 02.06.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer had received several affidavits given by Surya Prakash, Chunnilal, Saraswati, Daya Shankar, Sanwal Prasad, Sunil Kumar, Shiv Kumar, Shobha, and Babloo addressing the Superintendent of Police, Gonda for proper investigation of the case crime and getting the CDR of accused Daddan and Shiv Pujan Dubey. The typed copy of the CD-19 dated 30.08.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That the supplementary medical report dated 09.06.2020 was received by the Investigation Officer in which mentioned that ‘No sperm seen in the smear exeed” and also there was no opinion was given regarding the rape of the victim. The typed copy of the CD-20 dated 31.08.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 09 to this affidavit. That the further statement of the victim was been recorded by the Investigating Officer on 31.08.2020, in which several specific questions were asked of her. The typed copy of the further statement of the victim dated 31.08.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer recorded statements of all persons, who have given their affidavit in support of accused Daddan and Shiv Pujan Dubey, in which they stated that due to animosity, the rivals of Daddan and Shiv Pujan Dubey have falsely implicated them with the help of informant and victim. The photocopy of the statements of the deponents of the affidavits are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That on 09.09.2020, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the wife of the applicant in which she stated the truth of the entire conspiracy and denied all allegations made against the applicant. Two other witnesses have also stated that the applicant has not committed the offense as alleged against him. The typed copy of the statement of the wife of the applicant and two other witnesses dated 09.09.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer, later on, dropped the name of the accused Daddan alias Raj Narayan and Shiv Pujan Dubey on the basis of the CDR of both accused. The typed copy of the endorsement of CD-22 dated 09.09.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 13 to this affidavit. That the statement of the applicant was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 12.09.2020, in which he gave all details of the incident, which happened on 18.03.2020, and denied the commission of offense as alleged against him by the victim. The typed copy of the statement of the applicant dated 12.09.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 14 to this affidavit. That the statements of some persons namely Yakoob, Rahmuddin, Nizamuddin, Rajesh Kumar, Ajay Singh, Chandra Bhan Singh, and Tej Babadur Singh were recorded Investigating Officer on 12.09.2020, in which they supported the story of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the witnesses dated 12.09.2020 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 15 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer of the case crime, on 12.09.2020 after concluding the investigation of the case crime gave a summary of the case and deleted Section 376, 120-B of IPC and 3, 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and also dropped the name of the Daddan alias Raj Narayan, Shiv Pujan Dubey and Nageshwar Mishra from the case crime. The typed copy of the endorsement of the Investigating Officer dated 12.09.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 16 to this affidavit. That the Investigating Officer, without proper investigation of the case crime, ignoring the truth of the case, a charge sheet has been filed by the concerned police against the applicant on 12.09.2020 under Sections, 363, 342 of IPC. The typed copy of the endorsement of the Investigating Officer in CD-23 dated 12.09.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 17 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case crime is that the applicant has no concerns with the alleged incident as stated by the victim of the case crime. That on 18.03.2020, the victim met with the applicant and asked for lift. When the victim did not tell her destination, then the applicant asked where she wanted to go. The victim requested to bring her to his house. That the victim further stated that her mother had beaten her and thrown her from her house and she had been hungry for the last two days, If he would not help her then she commit suicide. That the applicant had no option then decided to help her and bring her to his home and thereafter went to in marriage function on 18.03.2020. When he returned on 19.03.2020 and asked for the details from the victim about her family members. That the applicant after several efforts, found out the family members of the victim and he handed over the victim to her mother on 21.03.2020 in the presence of some respectable persons in the area. That later on, the applicant came to know that the victim has alleged that the applicant has committed rape on her while the applicant in a bonafide manner help her. That the victim named the applicant in the said first information report merely to ruin the name & fame of Daddan alias Raj Narayan, Shiv Pujan Dubey, while the applicant has no concern with the said incident. That the applicant is in jail 21.08.2023 without rhyme and reason, while the applicant was not involved in the commission of the crime as alleged against him. That neither the applicant has any motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. Merely ruining the name and fame of Daddan alias Raj Narayan, Shiv Pujan Dubey, the applicant has been framed in the said 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 Sections 363, 342 of IPC at Police Station – Paraspur, District – Gonda is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police and informant. 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 the applicant surrendered before the court concerned on 03.08.2023 and moved bail application bearing No. 2101 of 2023 before Sessions Judge, Gonda and vide order dated 03.08.2023, the applicant was granted interim bail till 21.08.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the learned court below on 03.08.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 18 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 2101 of 2023 before Sessions Judge, Gonda and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 21.08.2023. Free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 21.08.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 19 to this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 21.08.2023 without the commission of any offense & no any previous criminal history. 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. 60 of 2020 under Sections 363, 342 of IPC registered at Police Station – Paraspur, District – Gonda during the pendency of the case, in the interest of justice.
I, Dinesh Kumar Singh aged about 52 years son of Late Vijay Pal Singh resident of 715/605, Sabji Mandi, Karnalganj, District - Allahabad, Religion – Hindu, Education – LL.B., Occupation – Advocacy and the photograph of the deponent is affixed on the affidavit and his ID proof is enclosed with the affidavit, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother of the applicant duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That this is the second bail application, first bail application No. 6827 of 2013 was rejected by Hon’ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi “J” on 04.04.2014. That on 30.04.2013 about 06.30 Hours the informant Shri Ram Mishra lodged a first information report against 05 persons including the applicant bearing Case Crime No. 192 of 2013 under Section section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307/34, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. And Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act in Police Station – Sangrampur, District – Amethi. The photo and typed copy of the first information report dated 30.04.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That brief fact of the alleged prosecution story is that the alleged accused as mentioned in the first information report, the applicant and other accused persons of the above case crime, armed with the iron rod, Lathi & Danda came at the door of the informant, where the father of the informant sitting in courtyard, all the accused persons caught hold and dragged him up to the tree by assaulting mercilessly. The mother and brother-in-law of the informant namely Girija Shankar with the help of 108 brought to the injured at Community Health Centre, Amethi from where he was referred to where he is being treated and there is least possibility of his survival. That the injured was hospitalized at Mayo Medical Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gomti Nagar, Lucknow on 30.04.2013 at 12.30 p.m. and was expired on 19.05.2013 at 06.40p.m.. The police of Gomti Nagar was informed for conducting the inquest through G.D. No. 44 at 07.20 p.m.. Photocopy of the letter dated 19.05.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That the inquest was conducted on 20.05.2013 at 09.05 p.m. at Mayo Medical Centre, Police Station – Gomti Nagar, in presence of the informant and chance eye witness Girija Shankar as per information, death occurred due to sustaining the grievous injuries during mar-peet. Photocopy of the inquest report is being filed herewith annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the doctor conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased on 20.05.2013at 3.30 p.m.. The death is ude to come as relult of anti-mortem head injury. The doctor has noted four injuries on the person of deceased, first is on the right side heads 3cm above the right ear, second injury is on the frond of right forearm 7.00 cm above right wrist joint, third injrry istated on the left forearm 9 cm above left wrist join, gourth injuries is right ankle joint. Photocopy of the autopsy report is being annexed herewith annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That it is admitted that the informant is not eye witness of the occurrence. His statement under 161, Cr.P.C. was recorded on 01.05.2013 and stated therein he was remained in private service at after hearing the news he came at the village. The statement of Girija Shankar Pandey resident of Padari, Gauriganj, District – Amethi stated therein the deceased was dragged by the applicant and others and was allegedly assaulted by Lathi, danda and iron rod. That thereafter the investigating offerthe statement in Smt. Rajpati wife of deceased stated in her statement that the applicant and co-accused Jitndra Singh have assaulted with Iron and Satyam and Ram Pratap assaulted by lathi and danda. The co-accused Sheetla Prasad caught hold the deceased in Osara and dragged him at the place of occurrence. Photo and copy of the witnesses are being herewith collectively as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That in the meantime the injured/deceased was being treated in , Gomti Nagar, and took his last breath on 19.05.2013. The case summary was prepared by Doctor Siddharth Singh who is hospital administrator. The Neuro Surgeon doctor Tarun Pandey has opined that the patient was referred for the head injury but there is no evidence of head injury. C.T. brain is normal. The group of doctors six in numbers have expressed their opinion that the patient progressed well in post operative period. The patient shifted to room on 07.05.2013 developed breathlessness (Penumonitis) on 08.05.2013 and was again shifted to I.C.U. expired on 19.05.2013. Dr. S. S. Gupta (M.D.) Chest was looking after the patient for respiratory problem. He was Tracheostomised by anti surgeon and was seen by me on 14.05.2013. The patient was also looked after by the plastic surgeon. The report of doctor who conducted post mortem is contrary with the report of the doctor who treated the patient from 01.05.2013 to 19.05.2013. Photo copy of the of the case summary given by the doctor Siddharth Singh Hospital in Administration dated 01.05.2013 is being herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That investigating officer took up investigation on 23.06.2013 again recorded the statement of the informant Shri Ram Mishra. He has stated that there was dispute of land, the accused persons armed with lathi, danda, iron rod surrounded his father. This incident was being witness by his brother-in-law and mother in side the house from the gap of the gates. The similar statement of Shri Rajpati and Girija Shankar Pandey without slight change. The investigating officer again recorded statement just to twist the story after seeing the post mortem. The investigating officer recorded the statement of doctor Unday Pratap Singh on 23.07.2013 who has stated that he was posted at C.H.C., Amethi and on 30.04.2013 at 9.00 a.m. examined injured Ram Akbal who was brought by 108 mobile vehicle, a that moment Naib Tahsildar Ajeet Singh also came there and recorded the dying declaration. It is to be noted that doctor Uday Pratap Singh has not given fitness certificate and he is referring that the condition of the patient was serious, the general conditions of the patient was very poor as mentioned in the injury report, in such circumstances, it is evident that the injured was not in position to make his statement. The dying declaration was manipulated and conducted under the political influence. Photo copy of the statement of doctor Uday Pratap Singh is being herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigation officer has made recovery of two pieces brick and one peace danda of wood, blood stain on 02.05.2013. Photo copy of the recovery memo is being herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the informant is not eye witness. Girija Shankar Pandey is the chance witness and brother-in-law of the informant. The statement of informant is to the effect that the incident was seen in side of the house is also belies the prosecution case. That the dying declaration is alleged to be concocted and manipulated. In the first information report weapon was lathi, danda and iron rod while in dying declaration dadasa, lathi and danda, bricks and the numbers of the accused were not specified. There was no injury report of gadasa and the same was not mentioned in first information report. In the first information report fire arm was alleged to be opened by katta while in dying declaration rifle has been attributed. In dying declaration the name of Sheetal has not been mentioned. The name of Ram Bahadur’s sons are not mentioned in first information report. The dying declaration is not in question answer form. That the dying declaration was recorded by the Tasildar on 30.04.2013 at C.H.C., Amethi. That the applicant and other co-accused persons have been falsely implicated only on the ground of suspicion as the murder of his father Samsher Singh, deceased Ram Akbal was accused along with other and was convicted under section 302 I.P.C. on 09.11.2000 in S.T. No. 141 of 1998 (State Versus Ram Akbal and others). The deceased filed an appeal being appeal No. 1048 of 2000 and he was on bail. The deceased Shamsher Singh was re-known advocate of District – Pratapgarh. That what absurd story has been cooked up by the prosecution that the person is having the rifle and tamancha will not used lathi, danda and iron rod. The first information report resembling with the autopsy report. The first information report is contradictory with the dying declaration. the statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. is also not corroborating with each other. That after 2008 no any criminal case is registered against the applicant. Case crime No. 107 of 1997 under Section 374 I.P.C. and bonded Labour Act, the applicant is on bail case is pending. Case crime No. 122 of 2008 under Section 147, 148, 3223, 504,506 I.P.C., the applicant on bail, case is pending. Case is crime No. 143 of 2008 under Section 3 (1) Gunda Act withdraw of the notice by the then District Magitrate. Case crime No. 148 of 2008 under Section 110 Cr.P.C., the proceeding is dropped. The applicant is on bail and the same is pending. That the applicant is innocent. The criminal history shown against the applicant has been explained in the preceding paragraph. There is delay in lodging the first information report. There is contradiction in first information report and alleged dying declaration. The injured/deceased was assaulted by the persons with whom civil dispute was pending, even after loosing the case in the . He was forcibly having the possession. The deceased was convicted in the murder of the father of the applicant and was on bail by the , this was suspicion and the applicant schooling students were implicated. That for proper adjudication of the case it is submitted that the applicant is falsely implicated by the police persons without any reason and as such the applicant does not commit any offence as alleged in the first information report. That the applicant in jail since . 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.

End of preview. Expand in Dataset Viewer.

README.md exists but content is empty.

Downloads last month: 30

Size of downloaded dataset files:

1.88 MB

Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:

545 kB

Number of rows:

197