The learned lower court, as is evident from the order impugned, had considered the further statement of informant recorded under para-3 as well as statement of mother of victim, Gita Devi under para-4 including that of Kajal Kumari, elder sister of victim recorded under para-8 of the case diary. Surprisingly, none of them happens to be an eyewitness nor they substantiated their status as that of hearsay. It has simply been disclosed at their end that during course of search they came to know with regard to involvement of these persons including the petitioner. Moreover, after going through the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it is evident that she had not disclosed apart from others, with regard to presence or involvement of the petitioner. Furthermore, under para-73, the statement of the victim has been recorded whereunder she has categorically stated that wife of Jitendra Sah is an innocent and in likewise manner under para-74, the informant has stated that after recovery of the victim, and further getting proper information with regard to occurrence, presence of wife of Jitendra Sah was nowhere. It has further been disclosed that she was made an accused on mere suspicion.
