SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 10275

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
SANJEET PUROHIT
GURJEET SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 1225 / 2026



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:14809]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1225/2026

Gurjeet Singh S/o Shri Kalu Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Ward No 11 Chak 50 Lnp Police Station Chundawadh District Sriganganagar Rajasthan (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail

Sri Ganganagar)

----Petitioner Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hathi Singh Jodha, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order

01/04/2026

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. at the instance of accused-applicants. The requisite details of the matter are

tabulated herein below:

S.No . Particulars of the Case
1. FIR Number 161/2024
2. Concerned Police Station Chundawadh
3. District Sri Ganganagar
4. Offences alleged in the FIR 109(2), 115(2), 331(6) & 3(5) of BNS, 2023
5. Offences added, if any 103(1) of BNS, 2023
6. Date of passing of impugned order 07.01.2026

order

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-applicant that

earlier charge-sheet was filed on 06.12.2024 against two other co-

(Uploaded on 04/04/2026 at 01:07:58 PM)

(Downloaded on 06/04/2026 at 08:16:53 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JD:14809] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-1225/2026] accused namely, Lakhveer Singh @ Labhu and Deepak @ Dipu for the offences punishable under Sections 109(2), 115(2), 3(5) & 331(6) of BNS, 2023, but after four months of the incident, deceased-Rajendra Kumar passed away and, therefore, challan was filed on 16.12.2025 against Lakhveer Singh @ Labhu, Deepak @ Deepu and present applicant under Sections 103(1), 109(2),

115(2), 3(5) & 331(6) of BNS, 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case only on the basis

of conjectures and surmises.

4. It is contended that as per the injury report injured/deceased Rajendra Kumar was examined on 18.09.2024 i.e. after 20 days of date of incident dated 30.08.2024, wherein two injuries i.e. injury No.1-blunt injury on the lower back region and injury No.2 on the left fronto-parieto-temporal region was reported. As per the postmortem report, the cause of death of deceased - Rajendra

Kumar is due to head injury.

5. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards the contents of FIR as well as the statements of eye-witnesses i.e. Subhash (PW.1) and Krishna (PW.2) and submits that the said witnesses have clearly stated that head injury was caused by Lakhveer Singh @ Labhu through a sharp edged weapon and no specific allegation has been levelled against the present applicant for causing any head injury to deceased-Rajendra Kumar. The injury attributed to the applicant is upon back of deceased-

Rajendra Kumar.

(Uploaded on 04/04/2026 at 01:07:58 PM)

(Downloaded on 06/04/2026 at 08:16:53 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JD:14809] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-1225/2026] 6. Learned counsel also submits that challan in the present case has already been filed and applicant is behind the bars since

20.09.2025.

7. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co- accused-Deepal @ Dipu, to whom no head injury is attributed has already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 in SB Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No.4565/2025.

8. Learned counsel states that case of the present applicant is not distinguishable from the case of co-accused-Deepak @ Dipu and thus, prays that applicant may be enlarged on bail on the

ground of parity.

9. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that since all the three accused have attacked upon deceased-Rajendra Kumar with common intention and the injuries caused were turned to be fatal thus, the

benefit of bail should not be extended to the applicant.

10. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties

and have perused the material available on record.

11. The result of po

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top