Kasish Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76871 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2023 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Kasish Raj D/O Jugal Kishore Prasad Resident of Village- Jalalpur, P.S.- Roushanganj, District- Gaya 2.
Kajal Kumari D/O Jugal Kishore Prasad Resident of Village- Jalalpur, P.S.- Roushanganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Samita Kumari W/O Pankaj Kumar R/O Mohalla- Koiribari, P.S.- Civil Line, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP For the Informant :
Ms. Pragya Sinha, Advocate Ms. Usha Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Civil Line Police Station Case No. 282 of 2023, dated 25.04.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 354-B,
2/5 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 66(c) and 66(D) of the I. T. Act and Section 14 (1) of the POCSO Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have antecedent of one case and are women and the informant alleges that she is a make up artist and does bridal make up and posts on her Instagram ID, further on 24.04.2023 she received a call on her mobile from mobile no. 6389104245 and the caller disclosed that her number was obtained from her Instagram account, next alleges that her follower messaged that request is coming to her from informant's fake Instagram ID in which photo of a girl whose bridal make up was done by her also features along with some obscene photographs, further brother of the girl whose picture is on the fake ID had received threat from mobile no. 7281858183 saying the picture would be made viral, thus, alleges that from her fake Instagram ID, her family members and customers are being harassed, hence, the fake ID be closed after deleting the video.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners are not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that one Princy, who is maternal niece of the informant, was having friendship with Anuraj Kumar. It is next submitted that when the said relationship came to the
3/5 knowledge of the family members of Princy, the brother of Princy went to the house of Anuraj and ridiculed him which offended Anuraj. It is next submitted that Anuraj by using the mobile of his sisters who are petitioners in the instant case viraled some pictures of Princy. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the instant FIR, it would manifest that the same is vague and cryptic. It is also submitted that informant was aware that Princy who is daughter of her own sister, Sarita, was being harassed by Anuraj and Anuraj had viraled her pictures, but then informant tried to implicate the entire family members of Anuraj.
It is also submitted that no doubt during the course of investigation, it transpired that the mobile from which the pictures went viral of Princy and the informant belongs to the petitioners, but then it is submitted that no prudent person would use her own mobile for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated, it is submitted that petitioners were completely unaware that their brother, Anuraj, would commit such an occurrence. It is further submitted that Anuraj had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 77801 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 09.04.
4/5 Co-ordinate Bench. It is also submitted that mother of Princy also instituted an FIR being Civil Line P.S. Case No. 423 of 2023 against Anuraj and petitioners, it is thus submitted that even informant of the instant case being own sister of mother of Princy was aware of the misdeeds being committed by Anuraj, but then for reasons best known chose not to disclose the same in the instant FIR.
5. The learned APP for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners, but are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that Princy and Anuraj were knowing each other and brother of Princy had objected the relationship, on account of which Anuraj committed the occurrence by using the mobile of his sisters.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Civil
5/5 Line Police Station Case No. 282 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T