42 police department had issued Ex. D32 on 04.10.2011 containing a list including at S. No. 26 - an unnamed informant -of persons given awards for their contribution. In the present case, all these materials i.e., evidence of DW-1 and DW-7 as well as the documents issued by the police departments/state governments itself, clearly points towards the involvement of DW-1, not merely at a peripheral stage, but on a pervasive basis, even after, in regard to the enquiry in the immediate aftermath of the crime, gathering intelligence information with respect to the probable accused; analysing call details, participating in the arrest, interrogation of the accused and even an involvement with further investigating steps leading to recovery of articles. 77. DW-6 Anil Verma (Neha’s father) in his statement had deposed that Neha was taken away for questioning much earlier, on 19.6.2011 itself. He deposed that on 21.06.2011 one Kishan Panwar from Crime Branch went to him and said that Neha was using a stolen mobile phone for which an inquiry was being conducted. At his behest, DW-6 asked Neha to reach home immediately. Once she reached, DW-6 contacted Kishan Panwar and informed him about her return from the office. He reached DW-6’s house 15-20 minutes later with DW-1. They checked Neha’s mobile phone and then left the place stating that Neha would be taken for about an hour and a half for inquiry. DW-1 did not disclose where she would be taken but allowed the witness DW-6 to accompany them at a distance. According to DW-6, Neha was taken to SP’s Office at Regal Crossing and taken upstairs. The witness was not allowed to go there, and instead was asked to leave, at which point he went home along with his son. He stated further that on 23.06.2011 at 07:30 AM or so he was asked telephonically to keep Neha’s clothes outside, as the police was coming to collect them. The police reached DW-6’s house in the evening at which point they took a maroon top and one pair of jeans. The witness was cross-examined by prosecution to suggest that his deposition was false; he denied it.