Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated by way of subsequent improvements; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Mohd. Hasnain on 14.11.2018, in the night of 13/14.11.2018 at about 1:00 a.m. when he and members of his family were sleeping, 5-6 miscreants entered in his house and was committing theft and when his brothers Chaman and Nasimuddin protested and attempted to catch them, they started committing marpeet wherein Nasimuddin was hit by butt of pistol and Chaman was dragged out of the house in Gali and was shot, and upon hue and cry, villagers arrived and caught two miscreants Achchan and Naved @ Naveli with unauthorized fire arms and injured persons were taken to hospital, where subsequently Chaman died; that in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., first informant repeated F.I.R. version, but in his additional statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded after 04 days, he stated that he secretly enquired and come to know that applicant and two others were also involved along with Achchan and Nam-e-Ali, who committed loot of gold and silver ornaments and also shot Chaman to death; that in furtherance of above additional statement of first informant, applicant and four others were apprehended in police party no injury encounter Case Crime No.349 of 2018, under section 307 IPC with recovery of Rs.3550/- from applicant, which was own money of applicant and simultaneously confessional statement of applicant was recorded in police custody, which is not admissible in evidence; that there is no incriminating evidence against applicant; that nothing incriminating has been recovered from applicant, as looted articles; that applicant did not participate in the incident
