Abhishek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86216 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-436 Year-2025 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar S/O Lalbabu Rai R/O Vill. - Karhatiya Bujurg, P.S - Kathara ( Goraul), Dist- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 436 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 308, 3(5) and 308(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 66(A) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act.
3. The SHO and the Investigating Officer of the case, in compliance of the order dated 20.01.2026, are present in the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 11.05.2025 at 08:00 PM, he was coming home from Mahua market when accused persons including the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86216 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026 2/3 petitioner intercepted him and forcefully took him to a lonely place and snatched his chain and Rs. 10,000/- and thereafter unveiled him and established unnatural sex and videographed the occurrence, thereafter started blackmailing the informant and even started extorting and extorted an amount of Rs. 1.5 Lakhs, thereafter the accused persons started demanding Rs. 2 Lakhs more, on refusal, the video was made viral.
5. At this stage, the learned APP for the State submits that the case was taken up on 20.01.2026 when the SHO and the Investigating Officer of the case were directed to remain physically present, since it was submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated and is a government servant and works as a Driver at Community Health Center, Sahebganj, Muzaffarpur. It is submitted that it has come during the course of investigation that petitioner is not a government servant.
6. The SHO and the Investigating Officer of the case who are present in the Court, submitted that during the course of investigation it transpired that the video went viral and in the video, the informant was seen unveiled completely. It is also submitted that investigation in the case is still continuing.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86216 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026 3/3 petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned APP for the State and the SHO and the Investigating Officer of the case that petitioner is not a government servant and that video of the informant went viral where he is seen completely unveiled.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
10. The personal appearance of the SHO and the Investigating Officer of the case is dispensed with. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T