0

IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSIONS JUDGE, PATIALA.

Rachit Kaushal Vs. State of Punjab

FIR No.0054 dated 13.06.2017

Under sections 406, 498A IPC
P.S. Women, District Patiala.

In the matter of bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C.

INDEX

Sr. Description Pages

No.
1. Application for urgent hearing 1
2. Application for bail 2-5

3. Affidavit in Support 6

4. Annexure A (Copy of FIR) 7-15

5. Vakalatnama 16

Dated :
AB ASSOCIATES
Arun Bansal
Advocate
Counsel for petitioner
 1

IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSIONS JUDGE PATIALA.

(VACATION JUDGE)

Rachit Kaushal Versus State of Punjab

In the matter of bail application U/s 438 Cr.P.C.

Application for granting permission to file the

above titled bail application during summer
vacations being urgent nature.

Sir,
It is submitted as under:-

1. That matter involved in the present bail application is

of urgent nature and is required to be filed during
vacations as there is apprehension of arrest of the
petitioner in some false case.

It is, therefore, prayed that the application be

accepted and plaintiff may kindly be permitted to file the bail
application during summer vacations being urgent matter
involved in it.
Submitted by:
Dated: 19.6.2017.

...Petitioner
Through Counsel:

AB ASSOCIATES
Arun Bansal
Advocate, Patiala
 2

IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSIONS JUDGE, PATIALA .

Rachit Kaushal aged about ___ years, son of

Sh.Rajesh Sharma resident of House No. 3087, Sector
35-D, Chandigarh
...Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Punjab.
2. S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Officer, P.S. Women, District
Patiala.

...Respondents

FIR No.0054 dated 13.06.2017

Under sections 406, 498A IPC
P.S. Women, District Patiala.

(First) Application under section 438 Cr.P.C. for

the grant of anticipatory bail.
************

Sir,
It is respectfully submitted as under:-

1. That prima facie no case of whatsoever nature is

made out against the present petitioner, who is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
present case by the police of P.S. Women, District
Patiala at the instance of complainant- Sarjeewan
Kumar Sharma son of Prem Chand Sharma,
resident of SCF 8, Third Floor, Urban Estate, Phase
2, Patiala. Copy of FIR is attached as Annexure A.

2. That the petitioner is innocent and has not

committed any offence.
 3

3. That a reading of the FIR makes it clear that the story

propounded therein is not believable and convincing.
The falsity of the case is writ large. The FIR is based
on total manipulation, concealment and suppression
of true facts.

4. That the petitioner is married to the daughter of

complainant namely Prachi Sharma, it is a Love
marriage and after her marriage, the behaviour of
complainant was not upto the mark and she caused
mental and physical cruelty upon the petitioner and she
left the house without any sufficient/ reasonable cause
and took away all her jewelery/belongings with her. The
petitioner made efforts to bring back Prachi Sharma to
the matrimonial house but her father pressurized the
petitioner to get the marriage of petitioner and Prachi
Sharma dissolved from the court but on refusal of the
petitioner, the father of Prachi Sharma has got
registered present false case against the petitioner.
Moreover the Prachi Sharma always compel to the
petitioner to live separate from his Parents.

5. That the present FIR has been lodged and the same is
based on untrue facts and has been lodged only to
harass and humiliate the petitioner. The petitioner
has not committed any crime as has been envisaged
in the FIR.

6. That the allegations in the FIR are totally false and

concocted. The true facts at hand are that the
petitioner never demanded any dowry from the
complainant whatsoever and the petitioner is being
dragged into an unnecessary litigation by the
complainant just to satisfy his lust for greed and for
the purpose of blackmailing the petitioner to extort
 4

money from the petitioner. The parents of petitioner

has borne all expenditures in the marriage
themselves. Thus the story propounded in the FIR is
totally false and fabricated and is only to harass and
humiliate the petitioner.

7. That there is no iota of evidence or any other evidence

against the petitioner.

8. That from the facts and circumstances as mentioned

above, it is very much clear that the petitioner has not
committed any offence as has been stated in the FIR
and the same is based on untrue facts.

9. That the police has registered a false FIR without

even issuing written notice to the petitioner and
thus, the police has violated the guidelines laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

10. That yesterday, the police of P.S. Women, Patiala

raided the house of petitioner but luckily the
petitioner was not present at his house and the
police threatened the family members to arrest the
petitioner in the above noted case. Hence the
petitioner is having apprehension of his arrest in
this case.

11. That the allegations levelled by the complainant in

the FIR are vague, false and general in nature. It
has become the tendency of the girls to lodge false
FIRs by leveling general and false allegations
against the in laws only to put pressure upon the
petitioner.

12. That nothing is to be recovered or discovered from

the petitioner and his custodial interrogation is not
 5

required in any manner. Moreover, the petitioner is

ready to join the investigation as and when called
for by the investigating agency.

13. That the petitioner is resident of above mentioned

address, hence there is no chance of absconding or
jumping over the bail by the petitioner.

14. That the petitioner undertakes to abide by all the

conditions imposed by the Honble Court.

15. That the petitioner is ready to furnish the bail

bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

16. That the petitioner undertakes not to leave India

without prior permission of this Honble Court.

It is, therefore, prayed that the application may kindly

be accepted and the S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Officers of P.S.
Women District Patiala may kindly be directed to release the
petitioner in the event of his arrest, in the interest of justice.

It is further prayed that during the pendency of the

present bail application the arrest of the petitioner may kindly be
stayed.

Note: Submitted by:

This is the first bail application

u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No other similar
...Petitioner
bail application is pending or Through counsel:
decided by any Court of law.
AB ASSOCIATES
Arun Bansal
Dated: Advocate
P/2178/2009
 6

IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSIONS JUDGE, PATIALA.

Rachit Kaushal Vs. State of Punjab

FIR No.0054 dated 13.06.2017

Under sections 406, 498A IPC
P.S. Women, District Patiala.

In the matter of application for bail U/s 438 Cr.P.C.

AFFIDAVIT

I, Rachit Kaushal aged about ___ years, son of

Sh.Rajesh Sharma resident of House No. 3087, Sector 35-D,
Chandigarh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-

1. That the deponent has filed the bail application under

section 438 Cr.P.C. alongwith this affidavit which is
first application and there is no such bail application
pending or decided by any Court.

Deponent

Verification:
Verified that the contents of this affidavit are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing has been
concealed therein.

Dated: Deponent