JUDGEMENT 1. Heard the parties. 2. The materials on record leave no room for any doubt that false statement was made on affidavit to support a bail application of accused Sita Ram Prasad Yadav. The affidavit was sworn by his brother, Girja Yadav, who is present in Court as per direction in our order dated 6th August, 2009. 3. Learned counsel for the contemnors submits that false statement supported by affidavit that Sita Ram Prasad Yadav as accused in no other criminal case, was made on account of a wrong impression created due to similar statement in the bail application, which was filed in the Court below and which require no affidavit in support thereof as per practice of the lower Court. It has further been submitted that Sita Ram Prasad Yadav, who could have been the beneficiary of false statement, has already suffered enough because of rejection of his bail application, mainly on that account. Already several months have passed since his prayer for bail was rejected due to such carelessness or deliberate false statement. It has further been submitted that the deponent, Girja Yadav, is brother of the accused Sita Ram Prasad Yadav and being illiterate he put his thumb mark on the affidavit and did not have any idea regarding the significance of such statement in the bail application. 4. It will not be safe or proper to accept the submission that such important statement regarding criminal antecedent was made on account of ignorance. Hence, we find, and hold both Sita Ram Prasad Yadav, the accused, and his brother Girja Yadav guilty of contempt of Court as they tried to mislead this Court on account of a false statement supported by affidavit. 5. Since the accused Sita Ram Prasad Yadav has already suffered further incarceration on account of rejection of his bail application, we do not propose to award any further punishment to Sita Ram Prasad Yadav. He is warned to be careful in future. 6. So far as Girja Yadav is concerned, after putting questions to him in Court, we find that he is a rustic villager and may not have realized the significance of such wrong statement. He has apologized to the Court and has assured that he will not commit such mistake in future. He is warned to be careful in future. 6. So far as Girja Yadav is concerned, after putting questions to him in Court, we find that he is a rustic villager and may not have realized the significance of such wrong statement. He has apologized to the Court and has assured that he will not commit such mistake in future. In view of such undertaking and apology, we take a lenient view and do not impose any sentence of imprisonment on Girja Yadav. Instead he is directed to pay a fine of rupees two hundred within a period of four weeks from today. Proof of payment of such fine shall be filed in this Court within a further period of two weeks thereafter. If proof of such payment is not filed then warrant of arrest shall be issued and in lieu of fine Girja Yadav have to suffer simple imprisonment for one week. 7. The case is disposed of with the aforesaid conviction and sentence.