Dismissed

Suresh @ Seesa S/O Bacchu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Aug 2025CRLMB/2292/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Section 483 BNSS in a murder case arising from FIR No. 27/2024. Material witnesses' Section 161 statements attributed the fatal fire-arm injury to the petitioner and a fire-arm was recovered at his instance; bail was refused and the trial court was directed to record witness statements on priority basis.

What the court decided

AI extract

Suresh @ Seesa S/O Bacchu Singh Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:33885]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2292/2025

¶4

Suresh @ Seesa S/o Bacchu Singh, R/o Phulwara, Police Station Chiksana, Presently Resident Of In Front Of G.p.f. Office, Police Station, Mathura Gate, Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Bharatpur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

	Versus
State Of Rajasthan,	Through Pp ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. J.P. Gupta
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP Mr. Arvind Sharma

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶8

Order

¶9

26/08/2025

¶10

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 27/2024 registered at Police Station Chiksana, District Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 341 and 506 of IPC.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that the specific allegation for causing fire-arm injury to deceased Sonu has been attributed to other co-accused Mukesh, who has been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 10.10.2024, passed in SB criminal misc. bail application No. 11282/2024. The prosecution version has later on being changed and in the statement rendered by the complainant under Section 161 of the

[2025:RJ-JP:33885]

[CRLMB-2292/2025]

(2 of 3)

Cr.P.C. he attributed the fire arm injury caused to injured on the present petitioner. It is also contended that the statement of witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer with an inordinate delay and there are every chances of over-implication. he further contended that the mother of the deceased in her statement stated that injury caused to deceased Sonu with the fire arm was caused by the present petitioner and other co-accused Mukesh. Similarly, other witnesses have stated that co-accused Mukesh was also present alongwith the petitioner and caused firearm injury to the deceased and the deceased died due to single injury at his lung. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long and the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the instant bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application. It is contended that the police after thorough investigation found that the petitioner caused death of the deceased Sonu by causing fire-arm injury. At the instance of present petitioner fire-arm was recovered. The material witnesses Soorajmal, Ramprakash, Dulichand, Kumarpal, Raju and Pohap Singh @ Pappu and Gordhan in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has specifically attributed the injury caused to the deceased to the present petitioner and examination of the witnesses is yet to be made. The case of the co-accused Mukesh who has already been enlarged on bail is entirely different from the present petitioner as the investigation has revealed that fire-arm injury was caused by petitioner,

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:33885]

[CRLMB-2292/2025]

therefore, considering the nature of allegation his bail application deserves to be dismissed.

¶21

Heard and perused the material available on the record.

¶22

It is not desirable for the court to express anything on the merits of the case. Considering the fact that the material witnesses in their statement rendered under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. stated that petitioner caused fire-arm injury at deceased and at the instance of petitioner fire-arm was recovered, therefore, considering the above facts, this court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the present criminal misc. bail application is dismissed.

¶24

Learned trial court is directed to record the statement of material witnesses on priority basis.

¶25

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶26

ashu /2

Suresh @ Seesa S/O Bacchu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Suresh @ Seesa S/O Bacchu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Kumar @ Chotu Maharaj S/O Late Shri Nathudas Bairagi Vs State of Rajasthan

Aziz Khan @ Aazad @ Azzi S/O Maksud Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra @ Raju S/O Shri Hajarilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Manakchand @ Pappu S/O Ghansilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Danish Mirza S/O Shahid Mirza Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Joshi S/O Late Moolchand Joshi Vs Enforcement Directorate