ADV Rajesh KASRIJA (ADVOCATE) 08 February 2011

affidaviat in support of bail application

IN THE COURT OF LEARNED SESSION JUDGE ,FEROZPUR.

State

VERSUS

Xyzxyz Singh age 32 S/O Xyzxyz Singh R/O Village Sahiwala Tehsil Fazilka Distt Ferozpur.

------------- Applicant /Accused

Application for regular bail in case F I R No 25 dated 15-01-07 Police Station Sadar Fazilka U/S 326/325/324/323/452/148/149 I PC pending in the court of Sh. Jarnail singh , Judicial Magistrate First class Fazilka.

Affidavit :-

Bimla Rani W/O Xyzxyz singh S/O Xyzxyz singh R/O village Sahiwala Tehsil Fazilka Distt Ferozpur do here by solemnly affirm ad declare as under:-

That the applicant/ accused Sh. Xyzxyz singh S/O Sh. Xyzxyz Singh is my husband.
That the abovesaid state case titled as State VS Xyzxyz Singh & others is pending in the court of Sh. Jarnail Singh Judicial Magistrate 1^st class Fazilka in which the applicant has also been arrayed as accused No 1 along with other accused.
That the accused is in judicial lock up at Fazilka since 16/17 –01-07 till today in the abovesaid case.
The applicant/ accused did not cause any injuries on the person of complainant Ashok Kumar or any other person with any weapon or Kappa nor entered in the house of the complainant with other accused as alleged in the prosecution story / or in the alleged accurance on dated 14-01-07 at about 6:30 P.M . The prosecution story is false and devoid of any truth & no recovery of any alleged weapon has been effected from the applicant / accused.
That the accused has been falsely involved/ implicated in the abovesaid case on account revengeful attitude of the complainant & his party Suresh Kumar etc towards the applicant /accused. The abovesaid persons Suresh kumar, Mangat Ram S/O Jawhara Lal , Ved Parkash, Kala Ram S/O Kashmir Lal, Hakam Chand S/O Harkrishan Lal & Kashmir Lal R/O Village Sahiwala, close associates on the night Diwali after illegally ,forcibly entering the home of the applicant male/ treated & threatened to murder/kill the applicant /accused. The applicant submitted the applications dated 25-10-06 & 28-10-06 before Police station sadar Fazilka & Chief Minister of Punjab and Chairman of Punjab Human rights commission Chandigarh. The complainant & abovesaid persons have formed an illegal group against the applicant /accused. The complainant & abovesaid persons had enmity/revengeful attitude against the accused because the applicant/ accused had purchased about 3 Marlas of vacant land/plot for construction of his house which the complainant party seriously intended to purchase & did not succeed in this object. The applicant/ accused has constructed one Kacha Room in the abovesaid plot & is residing in the same with his family.
That as per the prosecution story complainant party also caused injuries to Lakhmir Singh non applicant accused Lakhmir Singh , Jogindro bai and Gurdeep singh . Thus there is a cross version case. The complainant-injured party have already been discharged from the hospital. The accused /applicant is in judicial custody since about 50 days and is not required by the police.
That the applicant /accused is ready to furnish surety bond to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble court.
That the applicant/ accused will never misuse the concession of bail and under- takes to appear regularly in the abovesaid case in the lower court.
That there is no apprehension of absconding of the applicant/accused or tempering with the prosecution evidence/witnesses.
That it is first bail application filed by the applicant/accused before this hon’ble court and no such bail application on behalf of the applicant/accused is pending or decided by any other court of law.
That other accused namely Satnam Singh, Puran singh, Lakhbir Singh and Mukhitar Singh have already been released on bail by the Hon’ble court of Sh. U. S Gera LD session Judge Ferozpur vide its order dated 8-02-2007 and 27-02-2007.

(Deponent)

Verification:- I verify that the contents of the abovesaid affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief nothing has been concealed their in.

Verified at Fazilka

Dated :- 5-03-07

(Deponent)

Reply Follow

7 Replies

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate) 08 February 2011

Your affidavit is entirely different from us, what we use to file along with the bail application.

(Guest)

The bail petition u/s 439 Cr.P.C did not prescribe any affidavit format. All the matters were stated in third person and only the counsel signs the bail petition and a memo of appearance and notice to P.P

vijayan (lawyer) 08 February 2011

form of application for bail and the affidavit attached with it are different from place to place and state to state eventhough the contents are same. .No form of affidavit is specified by law and there is no need to follow the specimen form given by our learned collegue.

DR.SANAT KUMAR DASH (Eye Specialist) 10 February 2011

Whether a non Advocate can move a Bail Application in the Criminal court or not???

vijayan (lawyer) 10 February 2011

An accused can move bail application before the court for himself. An advocate enrolled as per law only can appear for another and move applications including bail application .

DR.SANAT KUMAR DASH (Eye Specialist) 13 February 2011

Thank You Dear Vijayan.

Please Mention the Section of Cr.P.C..........Which prohibit the third party to move Bail Petition?????

vijayan (lawyer) 14 February 2011

Dear Doctor,

Please go through section 303 of Cr.P.c.

303. Right of person against whom proceedings are instituted to be defended.

Any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court, or against whom proceedings are instituted under this Code, may of right be defended by a pleader of his choice.

So, an accused need bail can move it himself or he may opt a pleader of his choice to defend on behalf of him.

A pleader also is a third party but with certain qualifications.

Then go through the defenition of a pleader.

Cr.P.C section 2. Definitions. (q) "Pleader", when used with reference to any proceeding in any court, means a person authorized by or under any law for the time being in force, to practice in such court, and includes any other appointed with the permission of the court to act in such proceeding.

Read these two provisions of Advocates Act also.

29. Advocates to be the only recognised class of persons entitled to practice law.

Subject to the provisions of this Act and any rules made thereunder, there shall, as from the appointed day, be only one class of persons entitled to practise the profession of law, namely, advocates.

33. Advocates alone entitle to practise.

Except as otherwise provided in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, no person shall, on or after the appointed day, be entitled to practise in any court or before any authority or person unless he is enrolled as an advocate under this Act.

I think it will clarify the query.