Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51584 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2023 Thana- KATRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Pintu Kumar Son of Kapileshwar Singh Resident of Vill- Bariyarpur Tole, Jababipur, Ward No. 40, P.S.- Nagar, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s Mr. Yogesh Chandra Veerma, Sr. Adv. Mr.Dr. Bipin Chandra, Adv.
Rupa Rani, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP For the informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K. Anjan, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 26-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Katra P.S. Case No. 331 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections-354©, 354(d), 358, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections-66(A), 66(E), 67 of the I.T. Act.
3. As per allegation, firstly the petitioner took the victim into his confidence and he committed sexual assault on her. Later on, after taking objectionable photographs, he blackmailed her and when she denied to the command of the petitioner, not only he made the photographs viral but he sent the photographs and video to the sister and father of the victim.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51584 of 2024(3) dt.26-09-2024 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that except the victim, no one has supported the allegation. The provisions of I.T. Act are bailable.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner has not only ruined the life of the victim but he also made the indecent photographs viral and due to act of the petitioner, rest of the life of the victim has been ruined.
6. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail and accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U T