Allowed

Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/O Shri Shivram v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Nov 2025CRLMB/7271/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two accused in custody since March 2025 for offences including Section 103(1) BNS arising from a fatal physical altercation with a friend sought bail, arguing absence of mens rea and delayed trial. The court granted bail on furnishing personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicants enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to satisfaction of trial Judge.

Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/O Shri Shivram Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:46725]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7271/2025

¶4

Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/o Shri Shivram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Tuleda, Police Station Sadar District Alwar (Raj.) (Accused Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In Central Jail Alwar)

¶5

----Accused-Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Non-Applicant

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7272/2025 Dileep Kumar S/o Shri Kishorilal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Tuleda, Police Station Sadar, District Alwar (Raj.). (Presently Confined At Central Jail, Alwar)

¶11

----Accused-Applicant

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Non-Applicant

¶15

For Applicant(s)	:	Mr. Manish Gupta with Ms. Sweta Soni Mr. Vishvendra Sharma Mr. Kapil Gupta with Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Mr. Ankit Kumar
For Non-Applicant(s)	:	Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuriya

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶17

Judgment

¶18

19/11/2025

¶19

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicants. The accused-applicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 185/2025 registered at

[2025:RJ-JP:46725]

[CRLMB-7271/2025]

(2 of 4)

Police Station Sadar Alwar District Alwar for the offence(s) under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1) of BNS, 2023.

¶24

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants has submitted that applicants are the sole bread earners of their respective families, belonging to labour class. It is further submitted that applicants are in custody ever since 30.03.2025, charge-sheet has been filed in the matter and the trial will take long time to conclude. It is also submitted that the deceased-victim was one of the friend of applicants and death of the victim has occurred on account of physical altercation between the parties, without use of any deadly weapon, but by the usage of belt. It is further submitted that there was no premeditated plan by the applicants to cause death of the victim and the same has occurred on account of sudden physical altercation, establishing the fact that there is absence of mens rea in the present case. Moreover, it is submitted that as per the medical report, head injury sustained by the deceased is specifically attributed to some other person, named Mohit, and not to the present applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants has further placed his reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in NandKumar @ Nandu Manilal Mudaliar Versus State of Gujarat: Criminal Appeal No.1266/2014, Vijay @ Vijayakumar Versus State Represented By Inspector of Police: Criminal Appeal No.1049/2021 and Raju @ Chanakya Versus The State (Govt. of NCT) Delhi: Criminal Appeal 740/2024 and Criminal Bail 1361/2024 and has submitted that the allegations of causing murder has been leveled against the present applicants. However, the provisions of Section 103 of BNS which is

[2025:RJ-JP:46725]

[CRLMB-7271/2025]

(3 of 4)

equated to Section 302 of IPC, cannot be made applicable to the instant case as there is absence of mens rea qua the present applicants and death of the victim has not occurred at the time of the physical altercation with the applicants. It is further submitted that death of the victim has occurred next morning on account of need of medication after reaching his home. It is further submitted that at the time of physical altercation, all the persons, including deceased and present applicants, were under the effect of intoxication.

¶29

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the instant bail applications and reliance has been placed upon the judgment passed in the case titled Ram Naresh Versus State of U.P.: Criminal Appeal No.3577/2023 . It is further submitted that as per the medical report, several injuries including head injury, have been sustained by the victim on account of a serious physical altercation with the present applicants, resulting in death of the victim, and all of them were under the effect of intoxication.

¶30

Having heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel of the parties and considering the fact that applicants are the sole bread earners of their families, aged about 25-27 years; that applicants are in custody ever since 30.03.2025; that there are no criminal antecedents against the applicants; that charge-sheet has been filed in the matter and the trial will take its own time to conclude; that applicants were in close acquaintance with the deceased-victim and looking to the overall facts and circumstances but without commenting on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the accused-applicants on bail.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:46725]

[CRLMB-7271/2025]

Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicants Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/o Shri Shivram & Dileep Kumar S/o Shri Kishorilal shall be enlarged on bail provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶35

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶36

DEEPAK/12-13

Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/O Shri Shivram v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhanshu @ Sachin S/O Shri Shivram v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/O Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin Vs State of Rajasthan

Chetram Alias Pappu S/O Late Jaganlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kasveer Singh Son of Shri Gango Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish Meena S/O Chhitarlal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Anjali Soni D/O Radheyshyam Soni W/O Shri Pradeep Vs State of Rajasthan

Harimohan Meena S/O Sh. Banshilal Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan