Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8234 (RAJ)

VEER SINGH S/O LATE MUKANDI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/2748/2025 · 2025-08-22

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:34825] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2748/2025 Veer Singh S/o Late Mukandi, R/o Vamanpura, Thana Suroth, District Karauli (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Hindaun City). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Timan Singh For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 22/08/2025 1. This instant application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicant-accused Veer Singh S/o Late Mukandi, in FIR No. 476/2023 dated 24.12.2023 registered at P.S. Suroth District - Karauli, whereby the applicant- accused was charged under Sections 302, 450, 34 of IPC. 2. The applicant was arrested and is in judicial custody since his arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon grounds raised in bail application submits that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he submits that the investigation relating to present applicant-accused is complete and is no more required as a charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that the [2025:RJ-JP:34825] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2748/2025] investigation/trial will take its own time and no purpose will be served by keeping the applicant-accused in custody. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that complainant Sharda has registered a report on the ground of suspicion and after registration of report, police has investigated the matter and only on the basis of oral evidence, the petitioner accused is named as an accused. He further submitted that not a single circumstantial evidence is collected to show that the petitioner accused has committed murder of deceased Pitam Bai. He further referred evidence of PW-1 and submitted the she is not an eye-witness and only on the ground of suspicion she has lodged police report. He further submitted that PW-2 Hari Charan, PW-6 Parvati and PW-7 Taravati have turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. He further submitted that present petitioner accused is in custody since his arrest on 26.12.2023 and still trial has not concluded. 5. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted FSL report along with report received from P.S. Suroth, District Karauli. 6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 7. On the basis of report dated 24.12.2023 about murder of Pitam Bai a report is registered and after investigation police has found involvement of present petitioner accused and a charge-sheet has been filed. As per information on record seven witnesses were examined and out of which PW-3, PW- [2025:RJ-JP:34825] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2748/2025] 6 and PW-7 have turned hostile. The complainant is examined as PW-1. As per medical report the death of deceased Pitam Bai is due to asphyxia caused by throttling. There were multiple injuries on her body and all are ante- mortem in nature. The charge against present petitioner is under Sections 302 and 450 of IPC. The evidence of prosecution is in progress though at snail’s pace but still the petitioner is facing a charge of very serious nature, therefore, this is not a fit case wherein indulge of bail can be granted. 8. Hence, the bail application preferred by petitioner accused- Veer Singh S/o Late Mukandi is hereby dismissed. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /6