I, Dashrath aged about 42 years son of Shri Ram Das Resident of Village – Bisara, Kalli Pashchim, Police Station – P.G.I., District – Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Labour, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the relative/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to doing pairavi and files 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 applicant and 3 other persons on 09.07.2017 by informant namely Santosh Kumar bearing Case Crime No. 406 of 2017 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., at Police Station – Gossaiganj, District – Lucknow on false, incorrect and baseless grounds. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That fact of the first information report dated 09.07.2017 is in nutshell; the informant was sold his land gata No. 1353 situated at Village – Anandipur through his nephew namely Virendra, who is also named accused in said case crime. Thereafter Virendra offered to the informant for purchase of a roadside land, after spot visit the informant was ready to purchase said land in Rs. 5,00,000.00 and given Rs. 1,00,000.00 as advance and after giving another Rs. 1,50.000.00 on 16.04.2016 to the accused Virendra. Then on request of his nephew the informant, paid Rs. 1,00,000.00 on 08.06.2016 and Rs. 1,50,000.00 on 10.10.2016 and that day a deed was executed between the buyer & seller. When the informant gone his purchased land then he was informed by the villagers his purchased land is gram samaj land then the informant complaint to his nephew regarding said issue then his nephew threatened to him for life. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant was falsely implicated by the informant in said case crime with collusion of the concerned police. That the informant in his first information report stated that the accused persons executed sale deed on 10.10.2016 but on bare perusal of the alleged sale deed, it is crystal clear that the alleged sale deed is actually not a sale deed, it is agreement of sale, which is executed on 16.04.2016. The photocopy of the alleged sale deed dated 16.04.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police on 11.07.2017, in which the informant stated all most first information report version in improved manner and in detail. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2017 given to the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the informant in his statement stated that the applicant himself admitted he was involve in said case crime and received the Rs. 52,500.00 and he has given in writing to the informant on 04.07.2017 as he will pay Rs. 52,500.00 on 07.07.2017. That the real story of the case is that so far concerned to the applicant is that; the applicant has no concerned with the said alleged incident. The applicant and another accused Virendra i.e. nephew of the informant are known to each other being resident of same hamlet and also gone at house of the accuse Virendra at several occasions. That it was purely co-incident as at time of execution of agreement on 16.04.2016, the applicant was met at Registrar Office, with the accused Virendra and informant and stayed with them sometime. That later on when the fraud of the accused Virendra comes out at that moment the informant related the co-incident of dated 16.04.2016 and pressurized to the applicant for confessing his guilty, while he was not committed any offence as alleged against him. That the informant was approached to the concerned police for his help. Then the concerned police called the accused Virendra and the applicant at Police Station on 04.07.2017 and under forcefully taken a hand writing promising note mentioning therein as he was involve in committing said case crime and was given by the accused Virendra Rs. 52,500.00, which will be paid by 07.07.2017 to the informant. That when the applicant not paid Rs. 52,500.00 to the informant then the first information report has been lodged against the applicant without committing any offence as alleged against him. That the concerned police on 17.10.2017 added the Sections 419, 120B and 34 IPC in said case crime. That the applicant has not committed said offence but when the concerned police harassing the applicant and his family thereafter on 08.01.2018, the applicant surrendered before the competent court. That thereafter without proper investigation, ignoring the fact and circumstances of the case, investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and 4 other accused on 12.01.2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 506 I.P.C. bearing charge sheet No. 01 of 2018. That the applicant has no concerned with said fraud committed with the informant but the he was falsely implicate in said case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 506 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case except general allegations against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated and has no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1358 of 2017 before Special Judge, P.C. Act, C.B.I., Room No. 6, Lucknow, and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 05.02.2018. The copy of the order dated 05.02.2018 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That the applicant in jail since 08.01.2018 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant with regard to case crime No. 406 of 2017. That the applicant has no criminal history at all except to this present case. The applicant is law abiding person and having good reputation in the society. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the informant. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to 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, Dashrath aged about 42 years son of Shri Ram Das Resident of Village – Bisara, Kalli Pashchim, Police Station – P.G.I., District – Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Labour, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the relative/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to doing pairavi and files 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 applicant and 3 other persons on 09.07.2017 by informant namely Santosh Kumar bearing Case Crime No. 406 of 2017 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., at Police Station – Gossaiganj, District – Lucknow on false, incorrect and baseless grounds. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2017 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this application. That fact of the first information report dated 09.07.2017 is in nutshell; the informant was sold his land gata No. 1353 situated at Village – Anandipur through his nephew namely Virendra, who is also named accused in said case crime. Thereafter Virendra offered to the informant for purchase of a roadside land, after spot visit the informant was ready to purchase said land in Rs. 5,00,000.00 and given Rs. 1,00,000.00 as advance and after giving another Rs. 1,50.000.00 on 16.04.2016 to the accused Virendra. Then on request of his nephew the informant, paid Rs. 1,00,000.00 on 08.06.2016 and Rs. 1,50,000.00 on 10.10.2016 and that day a deed was executed between the buyer & seller. When the informant gone his purchased land then he was informed by the villagers his purchased land is gram samaj land then the informant complaint to his nephew regarding said issue then his nephew threatened to him for life. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant was falsely implicated by the informant in said case crime with collusion of the concerned police. That the informant in his first information report stated that the accused persons executed sale deed on 10.10.2016 but on bare perusal of the alleged sale deed, it is crystal clear that the alleged sale deed is actually not a sale deed, it is agreement of sale, which is executed on 16.04.2016. The photocopy of the alleged sale deed dated 16.04.2016 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this application. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police on 11.07.2017, in which the informant stated all most first information report version in improved manner and in detail. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2017 given to the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this application. That the informant in his statement stated that the applicant himself admitted he was involve in said case crime and received the Rs. 52,500.00 and he has given in writing to the informant on 04.07.2017 as he will pay Rs. 52,500.00 on 07.07.2017. That the real story of the case is that so far concerned to the applicant is that; the applicant has no concerned with the said alleged incident. The applicant and another accused Virendra i.e. nephew of the informant are known to each other being resident of same hamlet and also gone at house of the accuse Virendra at several occasions. That it was purely co-incident as at time of execution of agreement on 16.04.2016, the applicant was met at Registrar Office, with the accused Virendra and informant and stayed with them sometime. That later on when the fraud of the accused Virendra comes out at that moment the informant related the co-incident of dated 16.04.2016 and pressurized to the applicant for confessing his guilty, while he was not committed any offence as alleged against him. That the informant was approached to the concerned police for his help. Then the concerned police called the accused Virendra and the applicant at Police Station on 04.07.2017 and under forcefully taken a hand writing promising note mentioning therein as he was involve in committing said case crime and was given by the accused Virendra Rs. 52,500.00, which will be paid by 07.07.2017 to the informant. That when the applicant not paid Rs. 52,500.00 to the informant then the first information report has been lodged against the applicant without committing any offence as alleged against him. That the concerned police on 17.10.2017 added the Sections 419, 120B and 34 IPC in said case crime. That the applicant has not committed said offence but when the concerned police harassing the applicant and his family thereafter on 17.10.2017, the applicant surrendered before the competent court. That thereafter without proper investigation, ignoring the fact and circumstances of the case, investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and 4 other accused on 12.01.2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 506 I.P.C. bearing charge sheet No. 01 of 2018. That the applicant has no concerned with said fraud committed with the informant but the he was falsely implicate in said case crime. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 506 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case except general allegations against the applicant. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated and has no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1358 of 2017 before Special Judge, C.B.I., Room No. 3, Lucknow, and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 30.03.2018. The copy of the order dated 30.03.2018 passed by court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this application. That it is relevant to mention here that the free copy of the bail rejection order dated 30.03.2018 has been misplaced by the deponent due to which the same has been not brought on record before this Hon'ble High Court. The another certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 30.03.2018 has been annexed with this affidavit. That the applicant in jail since 17.10.2017 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant with regard to case crime No. 406 of 2017. That the applicant has no criminal history at all except to this present case. The applicant is law abiding person and having good reputation in the society. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the informant. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to 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, Prmila Yadav aged about 22 years daughter of Shri Badri Prasad Yadav resident of Village – Tirchha Peeng, Kunda, Peeng, Pratapgarh, Sangramgarh, Police Station - Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Illiterate, Occupation – Agricultural labour, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the sister/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to doing pairavi and files 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 the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application 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; on 02.07.2022, Shri Ayodhya Prasad son of Late Gayadeen resident of Village Tirchha, Police Station - Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) lodged a first information report bearing Case Crime No. 169 of 2022 under Sections 307, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh against the applicant and his brothers of the applicant and two unknown persons with regard to an attempt to murder of the husband of the informant by firing upon him with regarding incident dated 25.06.2022. The photo/typed copy of the first information report dated 02.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That the prosecution of the informant in nutshell is that on 25.06.2022 around 07.30 hours, the applicant and his brother were in a property dispute trying to take possession of the informant’s land and protested the same, the applicant and his brothers have beaten the informant and others by lathi, danda, iron rod. That the alleged incident took place as the informant on 25.06.2022 but the first information report has been lodged on 02.07.2022 i.e. more than 7 days delay, without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging FIR, which is questionable and doubtful as the informant aforesaid FIR on basis of legal advice to harass the applicant and his family members and also for blackmailing for money. That initially the injured persons have been brought for their medical at C.H.C. Kunda, Pratapgarh on 25.06.2022 around 10.30 hours, where their medical reports have been prepared and referred to S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj. The photo/typed copies of the medical reports dated 25.06.2022 of the injured are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That thereafter, the injured have brought to S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj on the very same day i.e. 25.06.2022, where the C.T. Scan of all three injured persons have been conducted. The photo/ typed copies of the S.T. Scan reports of the injured persons dated 25.06.2022 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That on a bare perusal of the medical reports of the injured person, they seem to be forged and fabricated so for concern to the S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj as the 2 C.T. Scan report has been handwritten while one is computerized. That after about two months the C.T. Scan of the injured person, the supplementary medical report of two injured were prepared on 06.08.2022 and about four months later the supplementary medical of the third injured was prepared on 01.10.2022 by the C.H.C., Kunda, Pratapgarh. The photo/ typed copies of the supplementary medical reports of the injured dated 06.08.2022 & 01.10.2022 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. th That the statement of the informant has been recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. by the concerned police on 03.07.2022, in which he almost repeated his first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 03.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the statements of the injured were also recorded by the concerned police on 25.07.2022 and 24.09.2022 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she almost repeated the statement of the informant. The typed copy of the statements of the injured are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the version of the injured has not collaborated with the medical report as the injured sustained injuries. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant and informant are residents of the same village and have a dispute regarding the land. That the informant is arrogant person and has enmity with some other villagers, as a result of the same on 25.06.2022, the informant and others fought with other, and they sustained injuries but later after well plan the informant cooked a false and fabricated story to falsely implicate the applicant and his brothers in the said case crime. That here it is relevant to mention that the applicant and his brothers were not in the village at the time of the incident and they were in Punjab, where they were working since long back. That the applicant and his brothers have been arrested by the concerned police on 11.08.2022, when the applicant and his brothers were retruned to their village on occation of the Rakshabandhan, which has been itself clered by the arresting memo. That there is no independent witness of the case crime, which also creat doubts upon the prosecution story. That it is also relevant to mention here that no case is made out against the applicant as alleged in the said application and the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicant was falsely implicated by the informant in said case crime with the collusion of the concerned police, Applicant has no concern with the said offence. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed this crime in question and the evidence available on record, itself shows that no prima facie offence under Sections 307, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 of I.P.C. registered, in the interest of Justice. That without proper investigation of the case crime, the investigating officer has submitted the charge against the applicant and his brothers bearing charge sheet No. 228 of 2022 under Section 307, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 of I.P.C. on 03.10.2022 That neither any evidence was found against the applicant nor has any motive been assigned to the applicant in the present case except general allegations. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated and has no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report. That there is no criminal history of the applicant accept present case and another  case, case crime no. 27/2022 Under section 323,504,506,IPC Police station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh. We have no knowledge about this aforesaid case. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 3760 of 2022 before Additional Session Judge, Room No. 3, Pratapgarh, and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 17.01.2023. The free certified copy of the order dated 17.01.2023 passed by the court concerned is being annexed as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.08.2022 without committing any offense as alleged by the informant. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question as alleged by the informant. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Court. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish 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 to Case Crime No. 169 of 2022 under Sections 307, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Maheshganj, District – Pratapgarh, in the interest of Justice during the pendency of case.


I, Hari Narayan Singh aged about 62 years son of Shri Sangam Singh resident of Village – Muraini, Dhangarh, Kunda District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Former, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant on new grounds before this Hon'ble High Court. Earlier the first bail application filed by the applicant bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 236 (B) of 2022 (Manish Singh Vs State of U.P.) has been rejected on 08.06.2022 by Hon’ble Justice Shri Rajeev Singh ‘J’. This is the second bail application of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. The photocopy of the order dated 08.06.2022 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the Smt. Shivraja Devi wife of Shri Radhey Shyam resident of Village - Muraini, Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) on the 22.05.2020 at 18.15 hours against the applicant and 11 others registered as Case Crime No. 79 of 2020 under Sections 147, 308, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 of IPC relating to Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 22.05.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant, the prosecution story is in nutshell that on 22.05.2020 around 03.00 PM, the applicant alongwith others including his family members were trying to close the drainage and on protest of the informant they have abused her and beaten her and her family members with lathi, danda and axe. The informant further alleged that when entered the house of one Raj Bahadur for saving her life then the applicant and other accused also entered on said place and beaten her and also broken the several items. That the informant and other persons have injured as stated by her but they have not approached to the doctor for their treatment. The medical of the injured conducted on 23.05.2020 and nothing was serious. The photo/copies of the medical of the informant and others are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the statement of the informant recorded by the concerned police, in which she almost repeated her first information report. That on Raj Bahadur, who have allegedly beaten by accused persons of the case crime has been died and the post mortem was conducted on 24.05.2020 in which 6 injuries shown and the cause of death ascertained as ‘anti-mortem head injuries’. The photo/typed copy of the post mortem report dated 24.05.2020 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That as per that post mortem, the deceased died due to head injury and the prosecution is silent on this point that who is author of said injury, because general role has been assigned to all the alleged accused persons including the applicant. That the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant and the said first informant report just to save herself and her family members from the consequences of offences committed by them, regarding which a criminal case has been registered by the wife of the applicant, while no such incident has taken place as alleged by the informant. That the real fact of the case is that the applicant and informant are resident of same village and having dispute regarding sahan, which is going on between them since long back. That 22.05.2020 around 15.00 hours, the uncle of the applicant namely Hari Prasad Singh, who is also accused in the case crime, was cleaning his Sahan land then the informant and her family members tried to restrain him for doing so and also abused him. That the uncle of the applicant, when restrained the informant and her family member from abusing then they assaulted upon him. On alarm of the uncle, the applicant and his father reached to the place of incident to save him then the informant and others again assaulted and for saving the life of his uncle, the applicant and his father entered their house but the informant and others not stopped and entered in the house of the applicant. That on alarm of the applicant, his father & uncle, several villagers reached at the place of incident and pelted stone upon the informant and others for rescuing the applicant and his family members and after sustaining the injuries from the stone pelting of the villagers, the informant and others has run away from the place of incident. That due to assault of the informant and her family members, the applicant and his family members has received grievous injuries. That after the assault of the informant upon the applicant’s family, they approached to concerned police lodging the first information report against the informant and others but due to extraneous reasons, which was offered/received from the informant, the first information report has not lodged. That when nothing was done by the concerned against the informant and others, while the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and others, an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. moved by the wife of the applicant before court concerned. That the aforesaid application of the applicant’s wife allowed and treated as complaint and in which the informant and 12 others have been summoned by the court concerned vide order dated 08.03.2022. The photocopy of the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant was sent to jail in connection of the said case crime and his bail applications have been rejected from court below and thereafter the applicant has moved bail before this Hon'ble High Court on 05.01.2022 and was pending before this Hon'ble High Court. That the informant for the malicious reasons, on his behest one Amarjeet Patel, who is allegedly injured of the case crime, lodged a first information report against the applicant and another on 21.05.2022 bearing Case Crime No. 434 of 2022 under Sections 506 of IPC registered at Police Station – Kotwali City, District – Pratapgarh stating therein that the applicant has given life threat to her in court premises. The photocopy of the first information report dated 21.05.2022 lodged by Amarjeet Patel is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the informant succeeded in her aim and in result of same on 08.06.2022, this Hon'ble High Court, rejected bail application of the applicant in view of the first information report lodged by Amarjeet Patel and issued direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within a period of six months. That the Case Crime No. 434 of 2022 registered on 21.05.2022 and till date no police report filed before the court concerned and investigation is still going on. The photo/typed copy of the questioner dated 21.09.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That apart from above mentioned, in which the second bail application is being moving by the applicant, two other false and wrong cases have been lodged against the applicant and in counter affidavit filed by the state in earlier bail, showing the 5 cases including the present case crime. The photocopy of the criminal history as given by the state in counter affidavit of Crl. Misc. Case No. 236 of 2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the case mentioned in the criminal history chart, in first case has been closed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh. S. No. 2 & 3 are proceeding of 110G of Cr.P.C., 4th is present and in 5th case (under Gangster Act), the bail application has not moved on behalf of the applicant. The photocopy of the order dated 14.12.2021 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That there is total 23 witnesses of the trial, which is going on before the trial and till date only five witnesses, in which four are witnesses of fact, have been examined and there is no hope to conclude the trial within 6 months as directed by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 08.06.2022. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 150 of 2021 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.01.2021. The photo copy of bail rejection order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the learned court is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant and their family members in malafide intention. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 26.05.2020 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the  may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 79 of 2020 under Sections 147, 302, 307, 308, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 of IPC related to the Police Station – Sangramgarh, District – Pratapgarh, during pendency of case.


I, Smt. Ruchi Singh aged 23 years wife of Shri Gajendra Pratap Singh resident of Village – Deehanehighat, Birkithai, Tahsil – Sirauli Gauspur, Police Station – Dariyabad, District - Barabanki, Religion – Hindu,  Occupation – Housewife, Qualification – Literate,  deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under :- That the deponent is the wife of the applicant and doing pairvi of the aforesaid case and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant on new grounds before this Hon'ble High Court. Earlier the first bail application filed by the applicant bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 1712 (B) of 2022 (Chhotu alias Gajendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.) has been rejected on 18.05.2022 by Hon’ble Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh ‘J’. This is the second bail application of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. The photocopy of the order dated 18.05.2022 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit. That the brief fact of the case for proper adjudication is being before this Hon'ble Court. That the first information report was logged by the opposite party No. 2 on the 05.10.2021 at 18.55 hours against the applicant and 3 others registered as Case Crime No. 173 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366 of IPC relating to Police Station – Dariyabad, District – Barabanki regarding the incident dated 27.09.2021. The photo/type copy of the first information report dated 05.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. That according to the First Information Report lodged by the informant, the prosecution story is in nutshell that on 27.09.2021 around 15.00 hours, the minor daughter of the opposite party No. 2 has been abducted by the applicant and others and the opposite party No. 2 tried his best to find out but his daughter is still missing. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 27.09.2021 at 15.00 hours but the first information report has been lodged after 8 days delayed i.e. on 05.10.2021 at 18.55 hours about without giving any explanation with regard to delay caused in lodging first information report, which is already questionable and doubtful as the opposite party No. 2 and his family lodged aforesaid first information after legal advice. That the statement of the opposite party No. 2 was recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which he changed the date of alleged incident from 27.09.2021 to 29.09.2021 and rest repeated his first information report. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 recorded by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. That the victim i.e. daughter of the opposite party No. 2 has been recovered by the concerned police on 06.10.2021 and her statement has been recorded by the concerned police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which she stated that the applicant had abducted her on 29.09.2021 and committed rape with her on 01.10.2021. The opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that his daughter abducted on 27.09.2021. The typed copy of the statement of the victim dated 06.10.2021 recorded by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the medical of the victim has been conducted on 08.10.2022 by the doctor concerned. During medical the victim said that the applicant molest her and she returned to village on 03.10.2021. The age of the victim ascertained 11 years by the doctor concerned and there were no spermatozoa found. The photo/typed copy of the medical of the victim dated 08.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is being recorded by the concerned Magistrate on 22.10.2021 i.e. after more than 16 days after alleged recovery of the victim. The victim stated in her statement that after commission of rape with her, she sent to her house on 03.10.2021 by the applicant’s brother. The photo/typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 22.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the victim was reached to her house on 03.10.2021 but opposite party No. 2 and other have lodged the first information report against the applicant on 05.10.2021, after taking legal advice in which the concerned police helped the opposite party No. 2 for extraneous reasons, which was offered by the real culprit of the case crime. That the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the opposite party No. 2 and the said first informant report just to take revenge with the applicant due to certain reasons, while no such incident has taken place as alleged by the opposite party No. 2. That the real fact of the case is that one Kuldeep son of Shri Ram Adhar Yadav resident of Village – Deeha hamlet of Kithai, Police Station – Dariyabad, District – Barabanki (hereinafter referred to as ‘main accused’). That there is a land dispute between the family members of the applicant and main accused of the case crime since long back and a civil suit is pending before the court concerned. That the daughter of the opposite party No. 2 having relation with the main accused since long time. That the family members of the main accused several time threaten the applicant’s family to face consequences of dispute, which is pending before them. That when the opposite party No. 2 came to know about the relationship of the main accused and his daughter then the main accused and his family conspire against the applicant and his family along with the opposite party No. 2. That the main accused and his family members paid huge amount to the opposite party No. 2 after selling his land for falsely implicating the applicant in false case of rape allegation. That thereafter the false case has been lodged against the applicant and main accused itself with the help of the concerned police for extraneous reasons. That here it is relevant to mention that if the allegation of the opposite party No. 2 is correct then why the first information report lodged on 03.10.2021, when the victim was returned to home. That the wife of the applicant born a baby girl on 08.07.2021 after major operation and the allegation made against the applicant that he abducted the victim and brought her to Lucknow along with his family i.e. wife, daughter, brother and bhabhi and residing under one roof and raped her. The photocopy of the birth certificate and discharge certificate of the applicant’s wife is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That after the lodging the first information report, the dispute between the applicant’s family and main accused family on high then the concerned police challaned the both parties on 14.10.2021 mentioning therein that the between the both parties has civil dispute. The photocopy of the challan report of the applicant’s and main accused family dated 14.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That the name of the main accused has been dropped from the investigation by the investigating officer after taking money from the main accused. In said regard the mother of the applicant moved an application on 11.11.2021 before the higher authorities of the police department and requested therein to transfer the investigation to another investigating agency in the interest of justice. The photocopy of the application moved by the applicant’s mother on 11.11.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the victim was with the applicant and others about 8 days as per first information report lodged by the opposite party No. 2 but she has never raised an alarm for her safe guard and even she has never stated before any authority or court that the she was under life threat. That the trial has been initiated in which the statement of the opposite party No. 2 as P.W.- 1 recorded on 05.05.2022, in his chief he stated that the applicant and main accused abducted her daughter and in cross examination he stated as “esjh yMdh dks dqynhi Hkxk dj ugha ys x;s FksA NksVw Hkxk dj ys x;k Fkk esjh yMdh dks iqfyl okys NksVw ds ?kj ij cjken fd;k Fkk” while the concerned police shows the recovery of the victim from Chhoti Miner, Laxmanpur. That the opposite party No. 2 himself admitted that the main accused and victim was in love, he stated as “esjh llqjky dLck bpkSyh esa gS usgk dk ufugky Hkh ogha gSa dqynhi dh Hkh fj”rsnkjh mlh xkao esa gS blfy, dqynhi dk vkuk tkuk usgk ds ikl gksrk jkgk gSA bl dkj.k dqynhi o usgk dk fnyh yxko iSnk gks x;k gSA” The aforesaid admission itself supported the averments of the applicant. The photo/ type copy of the statement of the P.W.-1/ opposite party No. 2 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 10 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim recorded before the trial court on 01.09.2022, in which she stated as “tc eq>s y[kuÅ x;s Fks mlds nwljs fnu esjs lkFk xyr dke fd;k FkkA eSaus NksVw ds HkS;k HkkHkh ls crk;k FkkA fQj NksVw eq>s vius xkao dh rjQ Hkstus yk;s Fks rks ekbuj ij esjs eEeh ikik o iqfyl okys fey x;s Fks rks NksVw eq>s NksMdj Hkkx x;sA ogkW ls iqfyl okys eq>s Fkkus ysdj x;sA” The statement of the victim clearly shows that she was returned to her house on 03.10.2021 and concerned police was also there but the recovery of the victim shown by the concerned police on 06.10.2021 for extraneous reasons. The photo/ typed copy of the statement of the victim given before trial court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 11 to this affidavit. That the conduct of the investigating officer was not fair and he was working for the main accused for extraneous reasons, which is clear by the statement of the victim, who said in her cross examination as “eSa y{e.kiqj ,d ckj Hkh ugha x;hA iqfyl okyksa us crk;k fd txg dk uke y{e.kiqj pkSjkgk ij viuh cjkenxh crkukA tc eSa vius firk dks fey x;h] rc Fkkus ij vk dj fjiksVZ fy[kk;h x;h] esjs firk th ds }kjkA” That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only false, incorrect facts and grounds and also concerned police avoiding the truth of case for extraneous reasons and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Room No. 44, Barabanki bearing Bail Application No. 2531 of 2021 but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 19.11.2021. The photo copy of bail rejection order dated 19.11.2021 passed by the learned court is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 12 to this affidavit. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members in malafide intention. That there are only two witnesses of facts i.e. opposite party No. 2 and victim, which has been examined before the trail court. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 29.10.2021 without committing any offence. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the  may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail Case Crime No. 173 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and 3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 related to the Police Station – Dariyabad, District – Barabanki, during pendency of case.


I, Sudhanshu Singh aged about 27 years son of Shri Anil Kumar resident of Village Bhogi saray, Sarai Bhogi District – Jaunpur,  Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother in law/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh on 09.05.2021 at 22.34 hours against the applicant and one other person. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.05.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 16.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 16.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Tushar Dutt Tyagi, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the applicant is the gang leader of a gang, and Santosh Singh is the active member of the gang. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the two cases i.e. Case Crime No. 172 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 60, 60A, U.P. Excise Act and 63 of Copyright Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, and Case Crime No. 229 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 103, 104 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act and 63, 60(2)/63 Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court on 10.06.2021 and court below on 13.10.2020. The photocopy of the bail orders is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 01 in the accused column first information report dated 09.05.2021. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant in order to showing his good and hard work, falsely implicate the applicant in some case crimes. That the applicant does not committed any offence for his economical and physical benefit. The applicant is not convicted previously in any case crime. The allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated. That the applicant is in jail since 04.01.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 126 of 2012 under Sections 147, 323, 304, 325, I.P.C registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court below on 18.12.12 Case Crime No. 131 of 2012 under Sections 110G at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the case have ended. Case Crime No. 44 of 2009 under Sections 279, 304A, of I.P.C. at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 16.03.2009 passed by Court below. Case Crime No. 12 of 2022 under Sections 3(1) Gunda Act registered Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh. this case has ended in lapes of time. Case Crime No. 352 of 2020 under Sections 364-A I.P.C at Police Station – Kunda, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant granted bail on 07.12.2020 Case Crime No. 678 of 2020 under Sections 60/72 Excise Act 272, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and 63/64 of Copyright Act, 1957  at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court below on 22.07.2022. The photocopies of the bail orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court & court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this application. That apart of abovementioned cases, there are no other criminal history against the applicant. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 6, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 74 of 2024 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 23.02.2024 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial.


I, Smt. Savita Pal aged about 30 years daughter of Shri Om Prakash wife of Shri Akhilesh Kumar Pal resident of Village – Hudaha, Usari, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Graduation, Occupation – Hosuewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the wife/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the applicant and 5 other persons on 12.06.2023 at 01.20 hours by the informant namely Abhishek Shau son of Munna Lal resident of Village - Kina Ka Purwa, Bhagwa, Police Station - Kotwali City, District - Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 354 of 2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 394 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh regarding the incident dated 11.06.2023. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 12.06.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 12.06.2023, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that between Smt. Sangeeta Verma resident of the applciant’s village, and father’s brother of the informant namely Anil Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was enmity. On 09.06.2023, the buffalo of said Smt. Sangeeta Verma grazed the paddy and thereafter Smt. Sangeeta Verma gives a life threat to the deceased. On 11.06.2023, the applicant along with other accused murdered the deceased by stabbing him. That the body of the deceased was brought to the P. M., Pratapgarh for conducting the post-mortem on 12.06.2023, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘shock and hemorrhage”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem report dated 12.06.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in her first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161  Cr.P.C. on 12.06.2023 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and some additional supportive facts to falsely implicate the applicant, which is beyond the belief. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 12.06.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. Tha the informant stated in his statement that he saw that the applicant and other accused stabbed the deceased and again stated that when he went to the roof he saw that the accused threw the dead body of the deceased on the road. That it was very strange that the informant, was seeing the murder of the deceased but kept silent, until the murder of the deceased. That the statements of the two alleged witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer on 13.06.2023, who supported the prosecution witness, while they are actually not eyewitnesses of the case crime, they are interested witnesses. The typed copy of the statements of the alleged eyewitnesses dated 13.06.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That a forged and fabricated arresting-cum-recovery memo was prepared by the concerned police by which some were accused of the case crime have been arrested. That the confessional statement of the accused namely Smt. Sangeeta Verma has been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 14.06.2023 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the arrested accused and applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the arrested accused Smt. Sangeeta Verma dated 14.06.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the arrested accused were recorded by the concerned police on 22.09.2023 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 recovered the knife from another accused namely Yogesh Kumar Pal on 15.06.2023. That the real story is that the applicant, informant & Smt. Sangeeta Verma are resident of the village and the applicant also has good family relations with the family of Smt. Sangeeta Verma. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was not a good person and he had a lot of emnies in the village and outside. That it is admitted by the informant himself that the deceased has enmity with Smt. Sangeeta Verma, due to which for small reasons, they fought with each other on several occasions. That on 09.06.2023, the deceased and Smt. Sangeeta Verma fought with each other and that moment, they both gave life threats to each other. That on 11.06.2023 the deceased was murdered by some unknown persons due to their enmity but due to extraneous reasons, for taking revenge from Smt. Sangeeta Verma, the informant lodged the first information report against Smt. Sangeeta Verma and her well-wisher. That the informant introduced some alleged eyewitnesses, who are also interested witnesses and well-wishers of the informant and deceased. That thereafter, the investigating officer of the case crime, submitted charge sheet No. 466 of 2023 against the 4 accused on 01.09.2023. Till date the investigation is going on so far related to the applicant. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant 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 147, 148, 149, 302, 394 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 2672 of 2023 before the learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 19.10.2023. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 22.09.2023 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 354 of 2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 394 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Pratapgarh, in the interest of justice.


I, Sonu Singh aged about 22 years son of Surendra Singh resident of Village - Kodrajit, Police Station - Baghrai, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is cousin brother of applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the  and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 100 of 2015 under section 304 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Baghrai, District – Pratapgarh on 04.07.2015 at 23:45 hours, against the applicant and one other person. The first information report is lodged by son of the deceased namely Shri Arun Singh. The true photo/type copy of the first information report dated 04.07.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that during the occasion of the “Panapuri”, which in organized by the Awadhesh Singh in his house. The several persons have been invited. The informant and his father namely Virendra Pratap Singh (hereinafter referred to as deceased) also invited. At that time the Rajesh Singh (who is also named in first information report) and Sintoo Singh was discussing in regard to the Pradhan election, suddenly in provocation of the Rajesh Singh, the applicant fired on Sintoo Singh but bullet hit the deceased. That the body of the deceased was send for the post mortem on 05.07.2015 at District Hospital, Pratapgarh wherein the post mortem was done by doctors. The photo/type copy of the post mortem report dated 05.07.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post mortem report the five injuries found on the body of the deceased as below: Multiple wound of entry of size .5*.5cm on Left face 2, Neck 2, Left shoulder 2, Chest 4, abdomen 5, muscle entry deep  55cm * 30cm 14 pills are recovered and sealed. That the concerned police went to the alleged incident place and prepare the site plan. On perusal of the site plan it is clear that the prosecution story is not supported the case of the information. The informant stated in his first information report, at the door step of the Rajesh, where the “Panapuri” fest was running, the alleged incident occurred but site plan shows the deceased and applicant about 70 feet away from the “Panapuri” fest. The photo/type copy of the site plan dated 05.07.2015 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the inquest report has been prepared by the concerned police on 05.07.2015 about 08.20 hours. That the statement of the informant has been recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 05.07.2015 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner but soul of the first information report in his statement. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 05.07.2015 is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That on 07.07.2015, the further statement has been recorded by the concerned police and therein he change his statement and alleged as the Rajesh Singh has enmity with family of the informant because in year of 2006 the brother of the informant lodged a first information report against Rajesh Singh under Section 307 of I.P.C. as case crime No. 151 of 2006 at Police Station - Baghrai. Due to which, being the applicant is supporter of the Rajesh Singh and on provocation of him, the applicant fired on father of the applicant. The type copy of the further statement of the informant dated 07.07.2015 is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That after the further statement of the informant the Sections has been altered 304 to 302, 3 of I.P.C.. That as per prosecution story the alleged incident occurred in public place during the “Panapuri” fest but only two eye witness has been assigned by the informant, who are interested witnesses. That it is also questionable if Rajesh Singh and family of the informant has enmity then why the deceased and informant participating in the “Panapuri” fest. That on 21.07.2015, the concerned police arrested the applicant from his house but showing good work of them, prepared a forged arresting memo and also prepared a forged and fabricated recovery memo of the Katta. That in meantime, the informant moved an application before the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh along with his affidavit and 11 other persons affidavit in regard to deleting the name of the another accused Rajesh Singh, from the first information report dated 04.07.2015. That thereafter again, further statement of the informant has been recorded on 22.07.2015 and informant again changed his statement and state that at time of the incident, Rajesh Singh is not present on incident place. The name of the Rajesh Singh has been falsely implicated in the first information report dated 04.07.2015 on influence of the some villagers. The photo/type copy of the further statement dated 22.07.2015 of the informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the informant has not reliable person as he is regularly changing his statements and as such the prosecution story is unbelievable and also the first information report lodged by the informant is questionable. That after that suddenly several eve witnesses of the case came before the concerned police, who are also give affidavit before the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh in regard non presence of another accused at time of alleged incident and repeat the further statement of the informant dated 22.07.2015 as the Rajesh Singh was present at time of incident and the applicant is fired upon the deceased. That role of the concerned police is also questionable as the statement of the witnesses namely Ranjeet Bahadur Singh and Roshan Singh not recorded by him till arresting of the applicant. After arresting the applicant on 22.07.2015 the statement of the alleged eyewitnesses recorded by the police and the both alleged eyewitnesses supported the story of the informant, which has been given by him in his further statement dated 21.07.2015. The photo/type copy of the statements of the eyewitnesses dated 22.07.2015 is being annexed herewith collectively as Annexure No. 7 to this Affidavit. That the investing officer submitted the charge sheet before the court concerned on 02.09.2015 bearing No. 56 of 2015, Police Station – Baghrai, District – Pratapgarh without considering the fact and reality of the case only against the applicant. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of case and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question, even each and every time the informant himself change the motive of the applicant. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidences available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under section 302 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and false motive which given in case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant in malafide intention. That no any involvement in the said case as alleged in first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. That the prosecution story does not supports the evidences available on record as the no source of light present at the alleged incident place. That against the applicant some cases are lodged and not likely to hope in future to commit any offence. Case crime No. 158 of 2006 under Section 147/148/149/307/504/506 IPC & 	7 CLA Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case nothing has been found against the applicant. Case crime No. 178 of 2006 under Section 10/116 Cr.P.C. at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. Case crime No. 104 of 2007 under Section 307 IPC & 7 CLA Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. Case crime No. 106 of 2007 under Section 25 Arms Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 178 of 2006 under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. NCR Case No. 43 of 2008 under Section 323/504 IPC at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. NCR Case No. 82 of 2008 under Section 323/504 IPC at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. Case crime No. 145 of 2008 under Section 147/307/504/506 IPC at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 171 of 2008 Gangster Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. NCR Case No. 148 of 2008 under Section 323/504/506 IPC at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. Case crime No. 248 of 2008 under Section 307 IPC at Police Station – Jethwara, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 396 of 2008 under Section 25 Arms Act at Police Station – Jethwara, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 98 of 2008 under Section 302 IPC at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 263 of 2010 under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gunda Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh. Case crime No. 30 of 2010 under Section 25 Arms Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Case crime No. 108 of 2010 under Section 25 Arms Act at Police Station – Baghrai, District- Pratapgarh, in said case the applicant enlarged on bail by the court concerned. That the applicant had applied for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 18.08.2015. The certified copy of bail rejection order dated 18.08.2015 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in Jail since   21.07.2015. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this . That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of case.


I, Aman Singh aged about 28 years son of Shri jai Bahadur Singh, resident of Village – Kalapur, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – _____________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother/pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and her photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the 2 persons including the applicant on 28.10.2020 at 17.35 hours by the informant namely Ajay Singh under Sections 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Udaypur, District – Pratapgarh regarding murder of his son namely Nitish only on basis of wrong, false and presumption, with regard to incident dated 24.10.2020. The certified/ photo/ typed copy of the first information report dated 28.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 24.10.2020 the son of the informant namely Nitish (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) went to the house of the applicant for money but as the deceased has love relation with one Moni due to which deceased was murdered by applicant and another accused Dharmendra Bahadur Singh @ Jokhu by firearm nearby the Sai rever. That the aforesaid first information report lodged after 4 days of the alleged incident without giving any explanation of delay, which itself creates doubts upon the persecution story. That the body of the deceased seen by one Ram Manohar resident of Village – Pathariya, Police Station – Udaypur, District – Pratapgarh, who informed the concerned police with said regard on 26.10.2020. That the inquest report of the deceased body was prepared by the concerned police on 26.10.2020 in presence of several villagers as unknown dead body. The photo/typed copy of the inquest report dated 26.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the body of deceased was brought to the District Hospital, Pratapgarh for conducting post mortem on 27.10.2020, where the post mortem was conducted and the cause of the death ascertained as ‘Shock and hemorrhage and head injuries following firearm injury.”. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report dated 27.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03  to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161  Cr.P.C. on 28.10.2020 in which the informant changed his first information report version and state that the applicant and another murdered the deceased by shooting him and thrown his body in Sai river, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The informant further stated that Moni has informed him with regard to murder of the deceased. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 28.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That on the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 27.10.2020 by the concerned police but for showing his good work, his arresting was shown in forged and fabricated arresting memo dated 28.10.2020. That the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police on 29.10.2020 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. The type copy of the confessional statement of the applicant date 29.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the statement of the one Smt. Shanti Devi, who is mother-in-law of Moni, has been recorded by the concerned police on 30.10.2020, in which she also stated that the applicant has love relation with Moni and he was obsessed with her due to which after the marriage of Moni, he always tried to met her. The deceased was several time tired to convinced to breakup the relation with Moni but he tried to continue the relationship with Moni due to which he was murdered.  The typed copy of the statement of the mother-in-law of Moni dated 30.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the statement of the Moni, with whom the deceased has love relation, recorded by the concerned police on 23.01.2021, in which she admitted that the deceased was at her home on 24.10.2020 and she herself informed the informant to stop the deceased otherwise it will not good for him. Typed copy of the statement of Moni dated 23.01.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the concerned police regarding the recovery of the piece of the shirt of the deceased, while as per concerned police, the applicant has murdered the deceased after well thought then there is no chance to kept the piece of shirt of the deceased. That the real story is that the deceased the resident of the state of Bihar and her sister has been married with one relative namely Prince of the applicant. That the deceased was having one sided love with the cousin sister of the applicant namely Moni and due to which he frequently visited the District – Pratapgarh. That the marriage of Moni solemnized by her parents but the deceased was obsessed with Moni and he started go to her marital house. After complaint of Moni, the deceased several times restrained to visit the marital house of Moni and do not ruin her marital life but he never stopped. That on 24.10.2020, the deceased went to the marital house of Moni and was caught by the some villagers and another accused who is Mama of the applicant, informed about that. The another accused requested to the applicant to reach as soon as marital house of Moni and brought the deceased as he will be late to reach the marital house of Moni. That the applicant picked-up the deceased from marital house of Moni and shifted in the vehicle of another accused to send him back to Bihar. The deceased journey to bus stop, requested another accused to stop for peeing and after stopping the vehicle the deceased runway. That the applicant was informed by his Mama regarding escaping of the deceased then they informed the marital house of Moni, if the deceased came then kindly informed. That thereafter on 26.10.2020, a unknown body recovered by the concerned police and on 27.10.2020, the informant identify the body and moved an application before the concerned police stated therein that he has indentify the unknown body as the deceased so do needful. The photo/copy of the application moved by the informant dated 27.10.2020 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That thereafter on the basis of the legal advice, the applicant and another accused has been falsely implicated in the said crime case on 28.10.2020 without any rhyme and reason. That thereafter without proper investigation and without considering the fact of the case the charge sheet submitted against the applicant and another under Sections 302, 201 of IPC on 23.01.2021. That the deceased has been murdered by anonymous persons but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime as they have several times approached to the informant and complaint against him son. That due to malafide intention, the informant for his self-satisfaction lodged the first information report against the applicant, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 302, 328, 201 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Udaypur, District – Pratapgarh is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 311 of 2021 before the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 10.02.2021. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 10.02.2021 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 10 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 29.10.2020 without committing any offense. That the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of his trial.


I, Ram Bahadur aged about 47 years son of Late Hanuman, resident of Village – Mulihamau, Police Station – Bhadokhar, District – Raebareli, Religion – Hindu, Education – Literate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the 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 her photograph is affixed on the affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That brief facts of the case is that a first information report has been lodged against the 3 persons including the applicant on 03.12.2021 at 23.50 hours by the informant namely Shiv Balak Yadav son of Late Hublal resident of Village – Pure Ranbahadur hamlet of Tikari Dandu, Police Station – Deeh, District – Raebareli (hereinafter referred to as ‘informatn’) bearing Case Crime No. 459 of 2021 under Sections 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Deeh, District – Raebareli regarding murder of his son namely Ankit Yadav only on basis of wrong, false and presumption. The certified/ typed copy of the first information report dated 03.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 03.12.2021, the son of the informant namely Ankit Yadav (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was murdered by the applicant alongwith his wife and brother by assault of axe and body of deceased in house of the applicant. That the inquest report of the deceased body was prepared by the concerned police on 04.12.2021 in presence of several villagers in which they opined that the deceased has murdered by the applicant alongwith wife and brother by assault of axe. That the body of deceased was brought to the P. M., Raebareli for conducting post mortem on 04.12.2021, where the post mortem was conducted and the cause of the death ascertained as ‘Asphyxia.”. The photo/ typed copy of the post mortem report dated 04.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and same depends upon concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161  Cr.P.C. on 04.12.2021 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and tried to implicate the applicant in said case crime, which itself false, incorrect and on the basis of presumption. The type copy of the statement of the informant dated 04.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on the applicant was arrested by the concerned police on 03.12.2021 by the concerned police when he was come to the house of the applicant, on call of the applicant’s wife, who is herself accused in the said case crime. That the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police on 03.12.2021 and also the concerned police recovered the axe and maflar on very same day. The typed copy of the arresting/recovery memo dated 03.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That thereafter during time of preparation of arresting/recovery memo, Section 34 of IPC has been added in the case crime by the investigating officer. That the confessional statement of the applicant has been recorded by the concerned police on 04.12.2021 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police. That the statements of the witnesses, who are brother of the informant, has been recorded by the concerned police on 04.12.2021, in which they stated that the deceased have illicit relation with the applicant’s wife and she has several time tired to convinced to break up the relation but deceased tried to continue the relationship with her due to which he was murdered. The typed copy of the statement of the witnesses dated 04.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it is also unbelievable as stated by the concerned police regarding the recovery of the alleged murder axe and maflar and the applicant has murdered the deceased after well thought alongwith the other accused then there is no chance to kept the recovered item of the deceased nor call made to the concerned police. That the real story is that the deceased having the illicit relation with the wife of the applicant since long back and when the applicant came to know that then she tendered apology and promised to not meet again with the deceased. That the deceased was obsessed and always tried to meet with the applicant’s wife and pressurized her to continue their relation, for which applicant’s wife was not ready. That on 03.12.2021, the deceased entered in the house of the applicant alongwith 2 others and the deceased tried to commit rape with applicant’s wife, on her alarm, two persons runaway and the applicant for saving his wife, pulled the maflar of the deceased, meanwhile the deceased fallen, where he sustained the head injuries. That the wife of the applicant, in the moment of heat, hit the deceased with stick. That there was no intension for killing the deceased, he was hit by the applicant’s wife in the heat of the moment and the applicant tried to save her wife from the deceased attack therefore in good faith, the call has been made to 112 on 03.12.2021 at 21.52 hours. The typed copy of the statement of PRV commander dated 16.12.2021 is being annexed as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That thereafter without proper investigation and without considering the fact and reality of the case, the investigating officer of the case crime, submitted the charge sheet No. 11 of 2022 against the applicant and his wife under Sections 302, 34 of IPC on 07.01.2022 and the brother of the applicant has been exonerated from said case crime. That the deceased has been died due to accident but the applicant and his wife has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for his self-satisfaction lodged the first information report against the applicant after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the concerned police and allegation against the applicant and also the prosecution story is totally against truth and same is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself show that no prima-facie offence under Sections 302, 34 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Deeh, District – Raebareli is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 891 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Raebareli and his bail application has been rejected by the court concerned on 23.05.2022. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 23.05.2022 passed by court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 07 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 04.12.2021 without committing any offense. That the applicant has no criminal history ever. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnished the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 459 of 2021 under Section 302, 34 of IPC relating to the Police Station – Deeh, District – Raebareli, during pendency of his trial.