Harsh Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar @ Harsh Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10094 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2024 Thana- BELAGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Harsh Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar @ Harsh Raj Son of Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Resident of Vill- Pipra, P.S.-Belaganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Vibhishan Kumar S/O-Devta Charan Prasad R/O-Vill-Pipra, P.S.-Belaganj, Dist-Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vardaan Mangalam For the State :
Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 376, 384, 385, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(E), 67 and 67(A) of the I.T.Act, 2000, registered in connection with Belaganj P.S.Case No. 308 of 2024.
3. According to allegation, the petitioner prepared vulgar videos of the daughter of the informant and co-accused Rahul Kumar and Monu Kumar made those videos viral.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He did not make any kind of video viral, neither he prepared the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10094 of 2025(5) dt.17-09-2025 2/2 video. He has submitted further that the relation between the petitioner and the alleged victim might be consensual. It has also been submitted that the informant went to the house of coaccused Rahul Kumar in order to complain and did not go to the house of the present petitioner.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the FIR itself shows that the petitioner snapped vulgar videos of the daughter of the informant and those videos were made viral.
6. Considering the severity of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail, which is hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T