LawChakra

Supreme Court Questions Suicide Theory, Seeks Clarification On Possible Homicide: “Whether A Person Could Shoot Himself On Chest With A Rifle”

The Supreme Court questions the suicide theory in a 17-year-old trainee’s rifle death, seeking clarification on possible homicide and whether one can practically shoot oneself in the chest with a rifle.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Supreme Court Questions Suicide Theory, Seeks Clarification On Possible Homicide: “Whether A Person Could Shoot Himself On Chest With A Rifle ”

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has raised serious doubts over the Madhya Pradesh Police’s conclusion in a tragic case involving the death of a 17-year-old national shooting trainee in Bhopal. While the police treated the incident as a suicide, the Court questioned the very feasibility of a person shooting himself in the chest with a rifle, calling for deeper scrutiny into the possibility of homicide.

Supreme Court’s Observations

On September 1, 2025, a Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed that,

Whether a person would be able to use a rifle to shoot himself on the chest needs examination.

The Bench directed the State of Madhya Pradesh to file a detailed affidavit within two weeks, clarifying whether:

The Court also ordered that the affidavit be accompanied by the post-mortem report and all investigation material, stressing that the truth behind the boy’s death must be uncovered. The case will next be heard on September 15, 2025.

Background of the Case

The deceased was a 17-year-old boy enrolled at the National Shooting Academy, Bhopal. According to his father (the petitioner, Arun Kumar Raghuwanshi), the boy faced severe harassment, ragging, and humiliation from fellow trainees, particularly the prime accused, Divyansh Singh Thakur.

The FIR was lodged only a month later, on January 1, 2025, under Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

High Court’s Controversial Bail Order

The father challenged this order in the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136 of the Constitution, arguing that the High Court’s reasoning trivialized the death of a minor and overlooked key evidence.

Appearance:
Petitioner’s Counsel: AoR Sumeer Sodhi, Advocates Varun Tankha, Inder Dev Singh, Vipul Tiwari, and Harshit Bari.
Respondents’ Counsel: DAG V.V.V. Pattabhiram, AoR Mrinal Gopal Elker, Advocates Gautam Singh and Aditya

Case Title:
Arun Kumar Raghuwanshi v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
SLP (Crl) No. 9053 of 2025

Read Order Here:

Read More Reports On Suicides

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES

Exit mobile version