Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36244 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- KOPA District- Saran ====================================================== Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi Son Of Ram Ayodhya Tripathi, R/O VillageItahari, P.S.- Rasulpur, District- Saran At Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate Mr. Amit Narayan, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kopa P.S. Case No. 01 of 2022 lodged under Sections 341, 323, 493, 420, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 67, 67A and 72A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
As per the allegation made in the F.I.R. it has been narrated that the informant, who is working in ICICI Bank, came in contact with the petitioner and during her closeness
2/4 different types of photographs used to be prepared. It has been alleged that subsequently the petitioner has started demanding ransom from the informant for which she has not ready, thereafter petitioner started threatening to make her video viral. It has been further alleged that the petitioner has uploaded her photo on video, Facebook, Whats app, Instagram and Twitter in the name of the informant, due to which the present F.I.R. has been lodged.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and informant are husband and wife, it transpires from Annexure-2 (series). He further submits that there was an apprehension to the petitioner from the informant and her family members and it is due to this reason, petitioner has also filed an informatory petition against them.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the bail application of the petitioner may be rejected as he has made the viral video of the informant, which is gross violation under Information Technology Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is
3/4 two criminal antecedent against the petitioner and both are different nature and filed by his agnates.
In the present facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Saran at Chapra in connection with Kopa P.S. Case No. 01 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. with other following conditions:
A. The petitioner shall support in trial and shall appear physically before the lower court on each and every date fixed, in case of non-appearance for two consecutive dates without sufficient cause, shall be resulted into cancellation of his bail bond.
B. One of the bailors shall be close relative who shall file an affidavit before the court about his relationship with the petitioner.
C. The petitioner shall file an affidavit at the time of furnishing of bail bond that he shall not involve in such criminal activity during the continuance of present bail bond, violation of this condition shall be resulted into cancellation of his present
4/4 bail bond.
With this observation, the bail application stands allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ravishankar/- U T