I, Budhai aged about 60 years son of Janjali resident of Pure Shiva Vaishy (Purwa), Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is father of applicant No. 2 and Pairokar of the applicants and doing pairvi of applicants in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicants before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicants have falsely been implicated in case crime No. 282 of 2013 under section 302/201 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 03.09. 2013. The F.I.R. is lodged by the father of deceased namely Brijlal Verma and the occurrence date is 02.09.2013. A true photo/type copy of the F.I.R. dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, accused/applicant is labor and other two accused person namely Prakash Saroj and Ram Bahadur are the contractor of wood and doing work of cutting the tree. They are call to son of informant namely Ram Prakash for laborer at morning 8.00 A.M. of 02.09.2013. When the son of informant was not came to home till 9.30 P.M. of night then informant enquired about his son then came to known that the all above are at the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. When informant go to said place, there was only accused are present with the stick and murmuring together, after seeing the informant they keep quit and told to the informant his son go to his home but deceased not come to home. The informant was searching his son but on 03.09.2013 the informant got information of the dead body of his son, which was found nearby the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. That after registration of F.I.R. the police of police station Lalganj, went on the place of occurrence and recovered the dead body of the deceased and prepared the inquest report on 03.09.2013. According to the inquest report the cause of death report due to injury caused on his head. That the statement of informant was recorded by the investigation officer at the place of occurrence on 03.09.2013 under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of informant supports F.I.R. version. A type copy of the statement of informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Ramdhani Verma was also recorded by the investigation officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and he is supports the prosecution story. A type copy of the statement of eyewitness is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased has also been done on 03.09.2013 and according to the post mortem report the cause of death is shock as a result of antimortem head injury. A type copy of the post mortem report dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is arrested by the police on 04.09.2013 after one day of arrest, the applicant sent to jail. That as a matter of fact nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicants and whatever recovery of the Lathi has been shown on his pointing out on 04.09.2013 by the investigation officer is totally false and planted one, which is itself evident from the perusal of the material available on record. A copy of the recovery memo is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicants in court concerned. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the any accused. That the no any motive is disclosed by the informant for the murder of his son. That according to the statement of eyewitness and informant the deceased was beaten by the all accused persons but in the post mortem report the cause of death shown only head injury. That a contradiction in the statement of the eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the all incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at night and when the eyewitness informed to the informant about the last night incident then why informant is mum on the part of eyewitness in his F.I.R.. That the eyewitness is stated in his statement two times the name of deceased Om Prakash while the deceased name is Ram Prakash. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement while the deceased has no any other name i.e. alias. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a  case of circumstantial evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicants/accused. Those applicants have not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That there is no motive assigned against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicants conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicants are respectable persons of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no chance of applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are in Jail since 05.09.2013. That the applicants will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicants are ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicants had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.11.2013. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 22.11.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial.


I, Budhai aged about 60 years son of Janjali resident of Pure Shiva Vaishy (Purwa), Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Illiterate, Occupation – Labor, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi of applicant in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photograph of the deponent is being pated on the first page of this affidavit and photocopy of Voter ID of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 282 of 2013 under section 302/201 I.P.C. registered at Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh on 03.09.2013. The F.I.R. is lodged by the father of deceased namely Brijlal Verma and the occurrence date is 02.09.2013. A true photo/type copy of the F.I.R. dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the according the First Information Report the prosecution story is, accused/applicant is labor and other two accused person namely Prakash Saroj and Ram Bahadur are the contractor of wood and doing work of cutting the tree. They are call to son of informant namely Ram Prakash for laborer at morning 8.00 A.M. of 02.09.2013. When the son of informant was not came to home till 9.30 P.M. of night then informant enquired about his son then came to known that the all above are at the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. When informant go to said place, there was only accused are present with the stick and murmuring together, after seeing the informant they keep quit and told to the informant his son go to his home but deceased not come to home. The informant was searching his son but on 03.09.2013 the informant got information of the dead body of his son, which was found nearby the Dharm Kanta of Rakesh Dwivedi. That after registration of F.I.R. the police of police station - Lalganj went on the place of occurrence and recovered the dead body of the deceased and prepared the inquest report on 03.09.2013. According to the inquest report the cause of death report due to injury caused on his head. That the statement of informant was recorded by the investigation officer at the place of occurrence on 03.09.2013 under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of informant supports F.I.R. version. A type copy of the statement of informant is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That the statement of eyewitness namely Ramdhani Verma was also recorded by the investigation officer under section 161 of Cr.P.C. and he is supports the prosecution story. A type copy of the statement of eyewitness is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the post mortem of the deceased has also been done on 03.09.2013 and according to the post mortem report the cause of death is shock as a result of antimortem head injury. A type copy of the post mortem report dated 03.09.2013 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the applicant is arrested by the police on 04.09.2013 after one day of arrest, the applicant sent to jail. That as a matter of fact nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicant and whatever recovery of the Lathi has been shown on his pointing out on 04.09.2013 by the investigation officer is totally false and planted one, which is itself evident from the perusal of the material available on record. A copy of the recovery memo is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the investigation officer filed the charge sheet against the applicant in court concerned. That the no any specific roll was assigned by the prosecution against the accused. That the no any motive is disclosed by the informant for the murder of his son. That according to the statement of eyewitness and informant the deceased was beaten by the all accused persons but in the post mortem report the cause of death shown only head injury. That a contradiction in the statement of the eyewitness and informant’s statement, according the eyewitness he was seeing the all incident at the time of occurrence and he was not informed to police or the informant at night and when the eyewitness informed to the informant about the last night incident then why informant is mum on the part of eyewitness in his F.I.R.. That the eyewitness is stated in his statement two times the name of deceased Om Prakash while the deceased name is Ram Prakash. This is unbelievable as the eyewitness stated in his statement while the deceased has no any other name i.e. alias. That according to the prosecution story it clearly reveals that no one saw the occurrence and there is no any eye witness of the case and it is a  case of circumstantial evidence and there is no an evidence against the applicant/accused. That applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report and he has no concern. That the applicant is very poor and any how maintaining his family but due to false implication, his family is on verge of starvation. That there is no motive assigned against the applicant. That the applicant is a respectable person of the society. He has never involved in any criminal activities and has no any criminal history. That there is no possibility of the applicant conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 05.09.2013. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 22.11.2013. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 22.11.2013 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicants be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial.


I, Pankaj Prajapati aged about 45  years son of Sheetal resident of Village –Jasmedha, P.S. – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, Religion – Hindu, Caste – Lohar, Occupation – Student, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the son of accused-applicant and Pairokar of the applicant and doing pairvi in the above noted case duly authorized by him and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That according to the prosecution story as narrated in the first information report dated 11.7.2009, at about 6:30 P.M., the applicant, deceased Kamlesh and their mother had gone to the nearby market and while returning back, the accused persons namely Kamlesh son of Mitthu Kumar, Sheetal son of Kallu Kumar and second son of Indra Bahadur Singh stopped the deceased and in the meantime, all accused opened fire arm on the deceased Kamlesh causing injury to him. After the incident the accused persons flew away on the motorcycle. The deceased died on the spot. True copy of the first information report is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That as a matter of fact. the applicant is innocent and has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report. That the incident is said to have taken place at about 6:30 P.M. on 11.7.2009 and the first information report was registered on the same day at about 20:30 P.M.. That the inquest report has been prepared on 11.7.2009 at about 21:10 P.M. in which five persons were witnesses of the inquest report. That the inquest of the deceased was drawn on 11.7.2009 in which complainant, Uma Shankar Shukla have been shown as inquest witnesses and as per the information of the witness the death was caused by fire arm injury. In the inquest nobody has been named as accused. True copy of the inquest report dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That it is relevant to mention here that the first information report is totally ante-timed and ante-dated and the assailants were not know to the complainant. The first information report was lodged on 11.7.2009 at about 8:30 P.M. but the fact is absolutely incorrect because from record (radiogram) which was supplied by the prosecution, it is clear that the first information report is ante-timed and the assailants were not known to the informant at the time of the incident. In this regard the copy of the Radiogram dated 11.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That according to the Radiogram which was received at 20.48 hours (8.48 P.M.), it is mentioned that three persons have fired upon the deceased. In the same Radiogram, which was received at 20.55 hours (8.55 P.M.), it mentioned that “Jisko Goli Mari Gai Uski Mrittyu Ho Gai Hai.” Whereas, in the first information report which was lodged at 20.30 hours (8.30 P.M.) under section 302 IPC. That it is relevant to point here that no first information report was lodged before 23.25 hours (11.25 P.M.), because the Radiogram, which was received 23.25 hours, the names of the assailants have been mentioned, meaning thereby that the first information report is totally ante-timed. The names of the accused persons and the first information report were lodged afterthought. That it is relevant to point out here that the deceased Kamlesh was interstate hardened criminal due to that reason he was having enmity with many person and due to that enmity and his criminal activities he was murdered in the night by some unknown persons in the unknown circumstances and no one has seen the actual incident and due to enmity and village party-bandi the applicant was roped in the false care of prosecution. That the criminal history of the deceased Kamlesh is as under Case Crime No. 71 of 2002, under section 302/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; and (c) informant Uma Shankar; Case Crime No. 46 of 2002, under section 307 IPC, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli, in which the accused persons were (a) deceased Kamlesh Shukla; (b) his brother Kalpnath; Case Crime No. 47 of 2002, under section 25 Arms Act, Police Station – Salon, District – Raebareli; Case Crime No. 327 of 2006, under section 452/323/506 IPC, Police Station – Lalganj, District – Pratapgarh Except above, there are many others cases upon the deceased which are unknown to the deponent at this time. That the postmortem of the deceased Kamlesh was conducted on 12.7.2009 at 2.20 P.M. in the District Hospital, Pratapgarh. True copy of the postmortem report dated 12.7.2009 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this Affidavit. That the complainant Uma Shankar Shukla stated in his evidence before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh that who has caused the respective injury to the deceased are not known to him and he has also stated that the deceased was not having any enmity with the applicant/accused. The copy of the statement of Uma Shankar Shukla is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this Affidavit. That the mother of deceased recorded her statement before trial court in S.T. No. 317/10 pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, District – Pratapgarh as P.W. – 2. The P.W. – 2 stated in her statement the deceased was not went to market with me. The copy of the statement of P.W. - 02 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this Affidavit. That the motive of the incident also not goes to the applicant. That there is no credible evidence on record, which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on record itself shows that no offence under section 302 IPC and section 25/27 Arms Act is made out against the applicant. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and he is willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is in Jail since 18.7.2009. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is innocent and he has no criminal history. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh but the same has been rejected on insufficient grounds vide order dated 16.12.2009. Certified copy of bail rejection order dated 16.12.2009 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial.


I, Rahul pushpakar aged about 26 years son of Shri Harikesh pushpakar resident of Village - Shringraverpur, Police station – Nawabganj, District – Allahabad, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Gardner, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is son of brother-in-law (Sala) of applicant and doing pairvi of Applicant in the above noted case and duly authorized by him for filing instant application before the Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case deposed herein under. That the photocopy of ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit and the application for waiver of the filing affidavit is being filed separately with bail application. That this is first bail application on behalf of the Applicant before the Hon'ble Court and not other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh on 09.10.2021 at 23.42 hours against the applicant and 3 other persons. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 03.10.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 03.10.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Chandra Bhan Singh, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the applicant is active member of a gang, which was headed by the applicant himself along with some other members. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the single case i.e. Case Crime No. 50 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of I.P.C., 60(2), 60A, 63 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, 63A of Copyright Act, 1957 and 103, 104 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 registered at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh, in the applicant has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court on 06.12.2021. The photocopy of the order dated passed by this Hon'ble High Court 06.12.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 04 in the accused column first information report dated 09.10.2021 as gang member. That the applicant is common man of society and has no concerned with the adulterated liquor. When the applicant came into knowledge that the concerned police searching the applicant, then the applicant has surrendered before the court concerned on 18.04.2022. That there is no concerned with the said allegation regarding illegal adulterated liquor as alleged by the informant of the case crime NO. 50 of 2021. The said informant lodged first information report on the basis of information given by the informer. That the applicant has a criminal history except this false case and detail of the said case is as under: Case No. RC-2 (S) 2013/C.B.I./SC-1/New Delhi under Section 302, 147, 148, 149, 323, 332, 353, 506 and 201 of IPC read with 149 of IPC and 27 Arms Act, in which nothing has been found against applicant and he has been exonerated from the charges. The photocopy of the supplementary charge sheet filed by CBI is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That in result of the above, the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the nothing was recovered in the regard of Adulterated liquor from the applicant’s possession and place in any manner, by the informant and the applicant has no concerned with said recovery in any manner, related to the case crime No. 50 of 2021. That the applicant is in jail since 18.04.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 5, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1057 of 2022 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 02.05.2022 passed by the court concerned is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That the applicant further declares in compliance of the section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangster and Anti–social Activities (Prevention)Act, 1986 that the applicant is committed any offense as alleged in the first information report and also he is not likely to commit any offense while on bail, if so granted by this Hon’ble High Court. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That it is further prayed that the requirement of filing an Affidavit along with the Application(s) may further be dispensed with in view of the Guidelines provided by the order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 09.01.2022. That the deponent further declared that after lifting the lockdown, he will be filed hard copy of the proper affidavit within one month. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 201 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Hathigawan, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial.


I, Karuna Shankar aged about 50 years son of Shri Kripa Shankar Tiwari resident of House No. F-637, Rajaji Puram, Avas Vikas Colony, Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the uncle/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 136 of 2023 lodged under Sections 498A, 323, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow on 09.07.2023 at 13.07 hours, against the applicant, his mother and his sister. The first information report is lodged by Shri Sarvesh Kumar Sharma son of Late Jograj resident of House No. 548/C747, Chandroday Nagar, Police Station – Para, District – Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter namely Vibha Sharma (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was solemnized on 05.12.2021. The deceased was tortured for the dowry and on 09.07.2023 at 01.24 hours the informant got information regarding the murder of the deceased. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant and his family members to get financial benefit. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his family members on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the informant and other persons on 09.07.2023. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 09.07.2023 at District Hospital, Lucknow wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors, and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about 12 hours back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 09.07.2023 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner and tried to develop his prosecution story to fill the loopholes of the prosecution story to send the applicant behind the bar merely being the husband of the deceased. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the mother and brother of the deceased was also recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 24.07.2023 in which they repeated the version of the informant in their own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant and his family members in said case crime. The photocopies of the statement of the mother & brother of the deceased dated 24.07.2023 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized on 05.12.2021 after getting/viewing information from the matrimonial newspaper. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and his family from the informant and his family as dowry prior to and after the marriage as alleged against the applicant and others. That initially the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased. That the deceased was an ambitious and dominating lady and she wanted to control the applicant & his mother and their decisions as well as she wanted to do the job. That the deceased was not interested in residing with the mother of the applicant due to which she was not used to taking care of her, after the initial days. That without the consent of the applicant, the deceased started her job i.e. teaching in a private school, due to which the dispute started between the deceased and the applicant. That after joining the teaching job, the deceased was not interested in doing the daily work of the house mainly the preparation of the food due to which the applicant was not happy and requested her to leave the job and take care of his family and house. That the applicant was taking care of her old age mother and due to her old age illness, as she herself was not able to prepare the food for her and other daily work, due to which the deceased was also not happy with the applicant. That the deceased was adamant about continuing her job and when the dispute between the deceased and the applicant increased, therefore, the mother of the applicant started living separately on the ground floor and also separated her kitchen. That after the separation from the mother of the applicant, the dispute was not settled between the deceased & the applicant even though the deceased was pressurizing the applicant to leave the house. That on 08.07.2023, the deceased fought with the applicant with regard to the job of the deceased and was not ready to leave at the parental house of the applicant as a result of same, she did not go to school. That due to the aforementioned reason, the deceased was upset and she locked her in the room. When the deceased did not open the door for a long time. The applicant called his mother then they saw that the deceased committed suicide due to her own reasons. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the applicant immediately informed the concerned police and informant after said unfortunate incident. The concerned police came to the house of the applicant and after breaking the door, the body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and his family members after getting legal advice just for his satisfaction while he is well aware that his daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons.. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That the applicant is being the husband of the deceased falsely implicated in the said case crime by the informant along with his family while the deceased committed suicide for her own reasons. That the informant due to extraneous reasons named the sister of the applicant in the case, while she is residing with her husband in another District, and during the Investigation Office, she was exonerated from all charges. That the statements of the neighbor of the applicant were recorded by the Investigating Officer as witnesses on 28.07.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they also supported the version of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the neighbor of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That several persons have given their affidavit before the authority concerned stating therein that the applicant is innocent and she is not involved in the commission of the offense as alleged against her. They further stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. The photocopies of the affidavit given by several persons are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer without proper investigation of the case crime submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others under bearing Charge Sheet on 28.08.2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 28.08.2023 submitted in case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima facie offense is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is a common man of society. He has never been involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offense. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in jail being the husband of the deceased since   10.07.2023 without committing any crime. That the mother of the applicant, who is also falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime has moved bail application before this Hon'ble High Court bearing Crl. Misc. Case No. 13798 (B) of 2023 (Smt. Aruna Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.), which has been allowed by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 22.11.2023. The photocopy of the order dated 22.11.2023 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing Bail Application No. 8068 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow on insufficient grounds vide order dated 26.10.2023. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 26.10.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow, during the pendency of the case.


I, Karuna Shankar aged about 50 years son of Shri Kripa Shankar Tiwari resident of House No. F-637, Rajaji Puram, Avas Vikas Colony, Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, Religion – Hindu, Qualification – Literate, Occupation – Self Employed, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the friend (neighbor)/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in case crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow on 09.07.2023 at 13.07 hours, against the applicant and 2 other family members. The first information report is lodged by Shri Sarvesh Kumar Sharma son of Late Jograj resident of House No. 548/C747, Chandroday Nagar, Police Station – Para, District – Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’). The certified copy of the first information report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That the informant stated in his first information report that the marriage of the applicant and his daughter namely Vibha Sharma (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was solemnized and the son of the applicant on 05.12.2021. The deceased was tortured for the dowry and on 09.07.2023 at 01.24 hours the informant got information regarding the murder the deceased. That it is relevant to mention here that the informant planned and falsely implicated the applicant and her family members to get financial benefit. Thereafter on the basis of legal advice, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and her family members on wrong and baseless facts. That the inquest report was prepared by the concerned police in the presence of the Panchan and also in the presence of the informant and other persons on 09.07.2023. That the body of the deceased was sent for the post-mortem on 09.07.2023 at District Hospital, Lucknow wherein the post-mortem was done by doctors and the cause of death was ascertained as ‘Anti-mortem hanging”. The photo/type copy of the post-mortem report dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the post-mortem report, the time of death of the deceased was about 12 hours back, which is also not collaborated with the prosecution story. That the statement of the informant was recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 09.07.2023 and therein the informant repeated his first information report version in another manner and tried to develop his prosecution story to fill the loopholes of the prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 09.07.2023 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the statement of the mother and brother of the deceased was also recorded by the concerned police under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 24.07.2023 in which they repeated the version of the informant in their own words and tried their best to falsely implicate the applicant and his family members in said case crime. The photocopies of the statement of the mother & brother of the deceased dated 24.07.2023 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That the real fact of the case is that the marriage of the son of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized on 05.12.2021 after getting information from the matrimonial newspaper. That nothing has been demanded from the applicant and her family from the informant and his family as dowry prior to and after the marriage as alleged against the applicant and others. That the relationship between the applicant and the deceased was good enough and there was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased. The photographs of the deceased and the applicant showing a good relationship are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the deceased was an ambitious and dominating lady and she wanted to control the son of the applicant and his decisions as well as she wanted to do the job. That the resistance of her husband, the deceased started her job i.e. teaching in a private school, due to which the dispute started between the deceased and her husband. That after joining the teaching job, the deceased was not interested in doing the daily work of the house mainly the preparation of the food due to which the son of the applicant was not happy and requested her to leave the job. That the son of the applicant takes care of the applicant being her old age mother and due to her old age illness, the applicant herself was not able to prepare the food for her. That the deceased was adamant about continuing her job and when the dispute between the deceased and her husband increased, therefore, the applicant started living separately on the ground floor and also separated her kitchen. That the tenant of the applicant was too good, mostly she prepared food for her in the applicant’s kitchen and the applicant had kept her distance from the dispute between the deceased and her husband. That after the separation between the deceased and her son, the dispute was not settled between them even though the deceased was pressurizing her husband to leave the house. That on 08.07.2023, the deceased and her husband fought with regard to the job of the deceased and taking care of the applicant, and as a result of same, she did not go to school. That due to the aforementioned reason, the deceased was upset and she locked her in the room. When the deceased did not open the door for a long time. The son of the applicant called her then they saw that the deceased committed suicide due to her own reasons. That here it is relevant to mention that the deceased was a short-tempered lady and she became more aggressive and also not in a position to make good decisions due to her anger and committed suicide. That the son of the applicant immediately informed the concerned police and informant after said unfortunate incident. The concerned police came to the house of the applicant and after breaking the door, the body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem. That the informant due to extraneous reasons lodged the first information against the applicant and her family members after getting legal advice just for his satisfaction while he is well aware that his daughter herself committed suicide for her own reasons.. That according to the prosecution story, it clearly reveals that the story of the prosecution is based on only presumption and concerned police avoiding the truth of the case and there is no evidence against the applicant/accused. That the informant due to extraneous reasons named the daughter of the applicant in the case, while she was residing with her husband in another District, and during the Investigation Office, she was exonerated from all charges. That the statements of the neighbor of the applicant were recorded by the Investigating Officer as witnesses on 28.07.2023 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., in which they also supported the version of the applicant. The typed copies of the statements of the neighbor of the applicant are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That several persons have given their affidavit before the authority concerned stating therein that the applicant is innocent and she is not involved in the commission of the offense as alleged against her. They further stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. The photocopies of the affidavit given by several persons are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 7 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer without proper investigation of the case crime submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and others under bearing Charge Sheet on 28.08.2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 28.08.2023 submitted in case crime is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself show that no prima facie offense is made out against the applicant. That the applicant has no motive to commit the alleged crime and a false motive which was given in the case, is cooked and fabricated by the concerned police. That since the applicant has not committed any offense as alleged but she has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant with malafide intention. That no involvement in the said case as alleged in the first information report, the applicant has no reason to murder the deceased. That there is no possibility of the applicant's conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is a common man of society. He has never been involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offense. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant/accused is in jail since   10.07.2023 without committing any crime. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That the applicant had applied for bail application bearing Bail Application No. 8068 of 2023 but the same has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow on insufficient grounds vide order dated 26.10.2023. The certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 26.10.2023 is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 9 to this affidavit. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station – Talkatora, District – Lucknow, during the pendency of the case.


I, Sunita  Singh aged about 33 years wife of Shri Arvind Kumar singh resident of  S - 5, Jail Road, P.R.D. Colony Homeguard, Alambagh District – Lucknow,  Qualification – Intermediate, Occupation – Housewife, the deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and  state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the sister /pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and his photograph is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such he conversant with the facts of the case. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That this is the first bail application on behalf of the applicant before the Hon'ble Court and no other bail application is pending before in any court of law on his behalf. That the facts giving rise to the present case are being stated in brief hereinafter. That the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh on 09.05.2021 at 22.34 hours against the applicant and one other person. The certified copy/ typed copy of the first information report dated 09.05.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this Affidavit. That prior to lodging the first information report the gang chart has been approved by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 16.04.2021. The photo/ typed copy of the gang chart approved on 16.04.2021 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this Affidavit. That according to the First Information Report, which has been lodged by Shri Tushar Dutt Tyagi, the then S.H.O., Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’), the prosecution story is in nutshell that the Santosh Singh is the gang leader of a gang, and the applicant is the active member of the gang. The gang is committing the offences in organized manner regularly as they are habitual, for their economic benefit and due to their terror no one can dare to speak against them. That the aforesaid case crime has been lodged against the applicant on basis of the one case i.e. Case Crime No. 172 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 60, 60A, U.P. Excise Act and 63 of Copyright Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 22.09.2019. The photocopy of the bail order dated 22.09.2019 passed by the learned court below is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 3 to this Affidavit. That the name of the applicant is shown at serial No. 02 in the accused column first information report dated 09.05.2021. That the informant falsely implicates the applicant, in the said crime for ulterior motive, which is baseless and illegal as the applicant is not involved in any criminal activity as alleged against him. That the informant in order to showing his good and hard work, falsely implicate the applicant in some case crimes. That the applicant does not committed any offence for his economical and physical benefit. The applicant is not convicted previously in any case crime. The allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated. That the applicant has no concerned with any gang in any manner as such the under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 have not applicable against him. That the applicant is falsely implicated in several cases lodged against the applicant, which the applicant has not committed any offense. The details of the case, which are lodged against the applicant, as per best knowledge of the applicant are as under:- Case Crime No. 229 of 2012 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 103, 104 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act and 63 Copyright Act, 60(2)/63 Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which nothing has been found against the applicant as such his name has been dropped from the investigation on 17.09.2020. Case Crime No. 13 of 2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 103, 104 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act and 63 Copyright Act, 60(2)/63 Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant was granted bail on 07.04.2023 the learned court below. Case Crime No. 31 of 2018 under Sections 138-A, Electricity Act, police station –Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has no knowledge about this case. Case Crime No. 60 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 of IPC and 63 Copyright Act, 60/63-A Excise Act registered at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh, the applicant has no knowledge about this case and till date summon has not been served upon the applicant. Case Crime No. 14 of 2024 under Sections 352, 504, 506 I.P.C at Police Station – Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has no knowledge about this case. Case Crime No. 184 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, Police Station– Udaipur, District – Pratapgarh, in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below on 29.02.2024. The photocopy of the typed copy of the C.D. – 5 and the photocopies of the bail orders passed by the learned court below are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. That apart of abovementioned cases, there are no other criminal history against the applicant. That the co-accused of the case crime i.e. gang leader namely Prince Singh has been granted bail by this Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 10.06.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Case No. 195 (B) of 2021. The photocopy of the order dated 10.06.2021 passed by this Hon'ble High Court is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit. That the applicant had applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge (Gangster Act), Room No. 3, AT Sadar, Pratapgarh bearing Bail Application No. 1026 of 2024 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 which is rejected by the court concerned without going to fact and records. The free copy of bail rejection order dated 01.05.2024 passed by the learned court below is annexed herewith as Annexure No. 6 to this affidavit. That the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the first information report by the informant and he has no concern. That there is no possibility of the applicant’s conviction because he has not committed the crime in question, as alleged by the prosecution. That the applicant is common man of the society. He has never convicted in any case and not involved in any criminal activities ever. That the applicant is in jail since 04.01.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against him. That there is no chance of applicant’s absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses and they are willing to offer bail to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant will cooperate with the trial and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if so granted by this Hon’ble Court. That the applicant is ready and willing to file adequate surety as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 81 of 2021 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station – Sangipur, District – Pratapgarh during pendency of trial.


I, Rijvan aged about 34 years son of Sher Ali resident of Village - Muraha, Dhema, Police Station - Motigarpur, District – Sultanpur, Education – 5th Class, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court.  No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 26.05.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 155 of 2024 under Sections 354 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station – Dostpur, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 24.05.2024. The certified copy of the first information report dated 26.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 24.05.2022, the opposite party No. 2 left his daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) at his brother-in-law’s house. On that day, around 08.30 PM when his daughter was returning home from the fair (Mela) at that time, the applicant molested his daughter. That the first information report was lodged around 2 days from the date of the alleged incident without giving any sufficient reason for delay, which creates doubt upon the prosecution story. That the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which she repeated the version of the first information report and not said the applicant committed rape with her. That the victim had refused to get examined medically after she was produced before the medical officer of the concerned hospital. That the investigating officer added Section 354-D, 376, and 506 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in the aforesaid case crime and dropped Section 354 of I.P.C. and  7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court, in which she stated that she changed her statement and also tried to develop his prosecution story to send the applicant behind bars. That the real story of the case is that the applicant and opposite party No. 2 are residents of the same area. That the applicant was running a shop for around 10 years, where he resided in a rented house. That there was a dispute between the applicant and opposite party No. 2 & his family regarding taking water from the hand pump, which is a public hand pump, for taking water for the applicant and opposite party No. 2. That on 24.05.2024, when the applicant was washing dishes and cloths on said public hand pump at that moment, at the time the victim objected, and later on, the opposite party No. 2 fought with the applicant. That the applicant was challened under Section 151/107/116 of Cr.P.C. on 25.05.2024 by the concerned police. The photocopy of the challan dated 25.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the applicant moved bail on 25.05.2024 and the same was granted to the applicant on the very same day. That when the applicant was released on bail, thereafter the opposite party No. 2 threatened the applicant to face the consequences for using the public hand pump. That thereafter, the opposite party No. 2 in well-planned manner, lodged the first information report saying therein that the applicant molested his daughter, and later the applicant has been charged a commission of the rape. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper unnatural, and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape the victim. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has collaborated with the version of the applicant, which clearly shows that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged against him. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1743 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 14.08.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the learned court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been languishing in jail since 21.06.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 155 of 2024 under Sections 354-D, 376, 506 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Dostpur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice.


I, Vijay Kumar Nishad aged about 28 years son of Shri Sugriv Nishad resident of 59-B Shivpur, Malhipur, Police Station - Chanda, District – Sultanpur, Education – Intermediate, Occupation – Agriculture, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the brother/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and a photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to him as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court.  No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged against the applicant and his father on 07.05.2024 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 203 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Chanda, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 06.05.2024.  The certified copy of the first information report dated 07.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 20.04.2022, the applicant allured his minor daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) and took her away anywhere and when the opposite party No. 2 went to his house then the father of the applicant came to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and given life threat. That on 10.05.2024, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he changed the version of the first information report and also tried to develop his prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 10.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That as per the case diary, on 11.05.2024, the victim was recovered by the concerned police, and on the very same day, the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the concerned police, in which she stated that she had a love relationship with the applicant and went with him on 06.05.2024 with her own WILL and resided under the bamboo tree four days as husband and wife and there is no fault of the applicant in said incident. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 11.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the victim had refused to get examined medically after she was produced before the medical officer of the concerned hospital on 12.05.2024 as she lived with the applicant with her own WILL and itself creates doubt upon the prosecution story and supported the version of the applicant. The photo/typed copy of the denial of the medical of the victim is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer added Section 376 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in the aforesaid case crime on 13.05.2024. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the concerned court on 15.05.2024, in which she stated that she loved the applicant and on 06.05.2024 she was scolded by the opposite party No. 2 as such she went to the river bank with him on 20.04.2022 and resided under the bamboo tree four days as husband and wife with her own WILL. The victim further said that the applicant was arrested by police on 11.05.2024 and later on she went to the police station. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 15.05.2024 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that the concerned police arrested the applicant on 11.05.2024 and arresting of the applicant on 17.05.2024 for extraneous reasons. That the real story of the case is that the applicant and opposite party No. 2 are residents of the same village. That the victim and applicant have fallen in love since long back and they met regularly with each other. When this fact came to the knowledge of the victim and her family then they came to the applicant’s house and restrained the applicant and victim to continue their love relationship. That the victim stated that she is more than 18 years hence the applicant and victim decided to solemnize their marriage with their own WILL as both are major in age. That on 06.05.2024, the opposite party No. 2 scolded her daughter thereafter the victim called him to meet at river bank. That the applicant and victim resided under the bamboo tree for four days as husband and wife, from where the concerned police arrested the applicant on 11.05.2024 and brought the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 is well aware that her daughter i.e. victim is major in age but he has lodged the first information report saying therein that the victim is a minor. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant and for extraneous reasons, the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape her. That without proper investigation of the case, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on 18.05.2024 against the applicant and under Sections 352, 504, 506 of I.P.C. against his father. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 18.05.2024 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has collaborated with the version of the applicant, which clearly shows that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged against him. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intentions. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 1544 of 2024 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 09.07.2024. The free certified copy of the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the learned court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been languishing in jail since 17.05.2024 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 203 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and  5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Chanda, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice.


I, Israr Ahamad alias Buddha aged about 72 years son of Mohd. Sulaman resident of Village – Bhulki, Chhatauna, Police Station – Kotwali Dehat, District – Sultanpur, Religion – Muslim, Education – Literate, Occupation – __________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :- That the deponent is the father/pariokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such he is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. The ID Proof of the deponent is enclosed and photo affidavit slip issued by the Oudh Bar Association is affixed to the affidavit. That the deponent further declares that the contents of the affidavit have been explained in Hindi by the counsel of the applicant to her as such she conversant with the facts of the case. That this is the first bail application of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court.  No any other bail application pending before this Hon'ble High Court or rejected by this Hon'ble High Court. That brief facts of the case are that a first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his brother on 24.04.2022 by opposite party No. 2 bearing Case Crime No. 394 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Sultanpur regarding incident dated 20.04.2022.  The certified copy of the first information report dated 24.04.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according the first information report the opposite party No. 2 stated in his first information report that on 20.04.2022, the applicant allured his minor daughter (hereinafter referred to as ‘victim’) and took her away anywhere, in which the brother of the applicant helped him. That the alleged incident which was occurred on 20.04.2022 but the first information report has been lodged on 24.04.2022 after about 4 days, without giving any explanation with regard to the delay caused in lodging the first information report, which is already questionable and doubtful as the informant and his family lodged aforesaid first information after legal advice. That on 25.04.2022, the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which he changed the version of the first information report and stated that the applicant eloped his daughter on 24.04.2022 around 06.00 hours and also tried to develop his prosecution story. The typed copy of the statement of the opposite party No. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 25.04.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That as per the case diary, on 23.07.2022, the victim has recovered by the concerned police, and on the very same day, the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded by the concerned police, in which she stated that she has a love relationship with the applicant since last two years and went with him on 20.04.2022 with her own WILL and residing at Ayodhya and the applicant has not raped her and she was pregnant at time of her recovery. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 23.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That on 23.07.2022, the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 has recorded by the concerned police, in which he stated that his daughter has eloped with the applicant on 20.04.2022. The typed copy of the further statement of the opposite party No. 2 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the investigating officer added Section 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and  3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in aforesaid case crime on 23.07.2022. That the applicant has been arrested by the concerned police on 20.07.2022 from his rented house i.e. from Ayodhya while showing in arresting memo he has been arrested from another place on 23.07.2022 for extraneous reasons. That the medical of the victim was conducted on 25.07.2022 at District Women Hospital, Sultanpur by the doctor. The radiological age of the victim was ascertained as 18 years. The photocopy of the medical report dated 25.07.2022 and supplementary medical report dated 27.07.2022 are being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 05 to this affidavit. That the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has recorded before the concerned court on 28.07.2022, in which she stated that she loved the applicant for the last two years and went with him on 20.04.2022 and resided with him in Ayodhya.  The victim further said that she was recovered by the police on 20.07.2022. The typed copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 28.07.2022 is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 06 to this affidavit. That it is relevant to mention that the concerned police recovered the victim on 20.07.2022 from the possession of the applicant from Ayodhya and also arrested the applicant but for showing the recovery of the victim and arresting of the applicant on 23.07.2022 for extraneous reasons. That the real story of the case is that the applicant is the friend of the son of the opposite party No. 2 and visited his house regularly to meet his friend. That the victim and applicant have fallen in love since long back and they met regularly with each other and the victim become pregnant. When this fact came to the knowledge of the victim and her family then they came to the applicant’s house and restrained the applicant and victim to continue their love relationship. That the victim stated that she is more than 18 years hence the applicant and victim decided to solemnize their marriage with their own WILL as both are major in age. That thereafter the victim left her house on 20.04.2022 and came with the applicant and residing in Ayodhya as husband-wife, from where the concerned police arrested the applicant on 20.07.2022 and brought the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 and his family know that the applicant residing in Ayodhya despite a false story cooked up by the concerned police and the opposite party No. 2 for obtaining the money from the state government, which is given to the rape victim. That the opposite party No. 2 lodged the first information report for getting the benefit of Rule 12(4) of the S.C. & S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, which is amended in the year 2016, in which, in the case of the S.C. & S.T. rape victim the state is given Rs. 5 Lacs to the victim. That the opposite party No. 2 is well aware that her daughter i.e. victim is major in age but he has lodged the first information report saying therein that the victim is a minor. That there is no genuine ground found by the concerned police against the applicant and for extraneous reasons the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant in said case crime. That the opposite party No. 2 is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident and prosecution story as narrated therein is highly improbable, improper and unnatural and unbelievable for a prudent man. The victim herself admitted that the applicant did not rape her. That without proper investigation of the case, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and  3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on 03.08.2022 against the applicant. The photocopy of the charge sheet dated 03.08.2022 submitted by the concerned police is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 07 to this affidavit. That there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the aforesaid case crime. That the statement of the victim under 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not collaborated with each other as such the above statement has no legal validity. That in the present case there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant did not commit the offence. That since the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged but he has been falsely implicated in the case by the opposite party No. 2 and their family members with malafide intention. That the applicant moved bail application bearing No. 2670 of 2022 before Sessions Judge, Sultanpur and his bail application has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Room No. 12, Sultanpur on 17.08.2022. The free copy of the order dated 17.08.2022 has been misplaced with the deponent hence the certified copy was obtained by him for filing this bail application. The certified copy of the order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the court concerned is being annexed herewith as Annexure No. 08 to this affidavit. That the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2022 without committing any offense as alleged against the applicant. That the applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid false case and is not likely to hope in the future to commit any offence. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertake that he will be never misused liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 394 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C., 3(2)V of S. C. & S. T. Act and  3/4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice.


I, Mohammad Munna Masoqali Hashmi aged about 46 years son of Masoqali Hashmi resident of Om Shiv Shankar Chawl, Pond Pada, Kalwa, District - Thane, Maharastra, Education –Literate, Occupation – Housewife, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:- That the deponent is the father/ pairokar of the applicant and duly authorized by the applicant to file the aforesaid application before this Hon'ble Court and as such she is fully conversant with the facts of the case and deposed as under. That the photo verification slip issued by the Awadh Bar Association of the deponent is being pasted on the first page of this affidavit and a photocopy of the ID proof of the deponent is being annexed with this affidavit. That this is the first bail application before this Hon'ble Court. No any other bail application is pending before this Hon'ble Court or rejected by this Hon'ble Court. That the instant matter is not related to CBI/Prevention of Corruption Act/ Enforcement Directorate /matters relating to NRHM Scam / GPF Scam/matters of MP/MLA etc. That brief fact of the case is that a first information report was lodged against the applicant on 12.01.2024 at 21.18 hours by the informant namely Mohd. Altaf son of Masooq Ali resident of Village - Mithenpur, Police Station - Kadipur, District - Sultanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘informant’) bearing Case Crime No. 31 of 2024 under Section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur. The certified copy of the first information report dated 12.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 01 to this affidavit. That according to the first information report lodged on 12.01.2024, the prosecution story is in a nutshell that the applicant is the nephew of the informant, who is working with him. On 12.01.2024 the applicant did not go to work with the informant and when his wife namely Sufeena Bano (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was alone at home. Around 3.30 P.M. when the informant returned to his home, he saw the running the applicant from house with a knife. When the informant entered his house he found his wife dead. That the inquest reports of both deceased were prepared by the concerned police on 13.01.2024 in the presence of several persons. That the body of the deceased and another were brought to the P. M., Sultanpur for conducting the post-mortem on 13.01.2024, where the post-mortem was conducted and the cause of the death was ascertained as ‘hemorrhage and shock”. The photo/ typed copy of the post-mortem reports of the deceased person dated 13.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 02 to this affidavit. That the version of the first information report is totally false and baseless and the same depends upon the concocted story as such nothing happened as alleged by the informant in his first informant report. That the investigating officer recorded the statement of the informant under Section 161  Cr.P.C. on 13.01.2024 in which the informant repeated his first information report version and tried his best to improve his prosecution story and collaborate the same with the post-mortem report of the deceased. The typed copy of the statement of the informant dated 13.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 03 to this affidavit. That the applicant has been arrested by the investigating officer from his house but for showing his good showed that the applicant arrested from another place. That thereafter, the confessional statements of the co-accused and applicant have been written/ prepared by the Investigating Officer on 14.01.2024 as per his wish and tried their best to collaborate with the alleged incident and witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. only to prove the offense against the applicant whereas the applicant has not committed any offense. The typed copy of the confessional statement of the applicant dated 14.01.2024 is being annexed as Annexure No. 04 to this affidavit. That the confessional statements of the applicant were recorded by the concerned police on 14.01.2024 under the life threat, in which the applicant said everything as narrated by the concerned police and the statement of the co-accused changed in comparison to the arresting memo. That it is most humbly submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case and there is no evidentiary value in the eye of the law relating to the confessional statements given by the arrested accused. That the alleged murder weapon has not been recovered till date by the concerned police. That the real story is that the applicant is the nephew of the informant and also worked with him and the deceased was an aunt of the applicant. That here it is relevant to mention that the informant doubts his wife so far relates to her character and he always tortured her. That the applicant has no relation with his aunt as alleged by the informant in his first information report and his statement. That on 12.01.2024 the deceased was murdered by some unknown person or by the informant himself as he had doubts about his wife's character but due to extraneous reasons, best known by the informant and concerned police, the applicant has been falsely implicated in said case crime. That the prosecution's story is unbelievable and beyond the imagination as the informant and other witnesses have explained the story of the police informar. That the concerned police on the basis of the phone location of the applicant, created the false story for extraneous reasons and the same has been repeated by the witnesses of the case crime in a similar manner. That the post-mortem report also did not collaborate with the prosecution's story, which clearly shows that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case crime. That the deceased was murdered by unknown persons or by the informant himself as he had doubts about his wife's character but the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case crime. That due to malafide intention, the informant for extraneous reasons, was falsely implicated in the first information report after knowing everything about the incident, while he has not committed any offense as alleged against him. That the applicant has no concern with the murder of the deceased in any manner as alleged by the informant and the allegation against the applicant along with the prosecution story is totally against truth and is not reliable in manner. That neither the applicant has a motive nor has any reasonable motive been assigned to him to commit the crime in question. That neither nothing has been recovered from the application possession nor pointing of him, which shows that the applicant has not committed the case crime as alleged against him. That there is no credible evidence on record that could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and the evidence available on the record itself shows that no prima-facie offense under Section 302 of I.P.C. at Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur is made out against the applicant. That the applicant moved bail application No. 1019 of 2024 before the learned District & Judge, Sultanpur, and his bail application was rejected by the court concerned on 29.04.2024. The free certified copy of the bail rejection order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the learned court below is being annexed as Annexure No. 05 to this application. That the applicant is in jail since 14.01.2024 without committing any offense. That apart from the above, there is no criminal history against the applicant. That there is no chance of the applicant absconding or tempering with the prosecution witnesses. That the applicant is ready to furnish the security and bond and also undertakes that he will never misuse the liberty of bail. That in view of the above, it would be expedient and necessary in the interest of justice that the applicant be enlarged on bail, in relation to Case Crime No. 31 of 2024 under Section 302 of I.P.C. relating to the Police Station – Kadipur, District – Sultanpur, in the interest of justice.