Deepak Singh @ Deepak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5660 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2025 Thana- DHAMOUL District- Nawada ====================================================== Deepak Singh @ Deepak Kumar S/O Surendra Kumar R/O Village- Manjour, P.S- Warisaliganj, Distt.- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Dhamoul P.S. Case no. 127 of 2025 registered under sections 77, 7, 351(3) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and sections 66(C), 66(E), 67 and 67(A) of the I.T. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the video call conversation between her and Deepak Singh, without her consent, was made public by the petitioner. This included the objectionable photographs of the informant. Further, the petitioner used to threaten her that he would make the life of the informant as also her family members, hell. This led to the informant registering a case being Dhamaul PS case no. 11 of 2025 wherein the petitioner obtained bail and he once

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5660 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/2 again started making the photographs of the informant, viral.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. It is a case of a one sided love affair. The video calling between the parties was taking place as the informant wanted to marry the petitioner. The petitioner who has a bright career is in custody since 22.10.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/ trial.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner being in the habit of repeating the offence alleged in the FIR even after the registration of the earlier Dhamoul P.S. Case no. 11 of 2025 wherein he obtained bail, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

6. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T