Patna High Court
Subodh Kumar @ Subodh Kumar SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Subodh Kumar, was charged in a criminal case for alleged financial fraud, sexual exploitation, and blackmail involving a video that was allegedly made viral. The prosecution alleged that he coerced the informant into a physical relationship, threatened her, and used a video to extort money, leading to charges under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the first alleged incident occurred in March 2023, the last in June 2024, and the case was only filed in October 2024, contending that the delay and lack of direct evidence of the video’s source warranted bail. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the failure of the investigating officer to seize the alleged source’s mobile. After hearing both sides, the court considered the delay, the nature of the evidence, and the presumption of innocence, and decided to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, to be filed with the appropriate court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite charges under the B.N.S. and I.T. Act for alleged sexual exploitation and blackmail
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and complaint affects the grant of bail
- Whether the video evidence and alleged threats constitute sufficient ground to deny bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- sexual exploitation
- blackmail
- video evidence
- delay
- Information Technology Act
- B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15951 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2024 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Subodh Kumar @ Subodh Kumar Sahni S/O Suresh Sahani R/O Vill.-
Chandrahatti, P.S.- Kudhani, Dist.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
Kudhani P.S. Case No.207 of 2024 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 64, 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3)
& 3(5) of the B.N.S. and under Sections 67, 67(A) & 66(E) of the
I.T. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner used to transfer money from the account of the
informant’s husband in his account as her husabnd is illiterate. It
is alleged that the petitioner started coming to the house of the
informant and on 03.03.2023, established physical relationship
and threatened the informant that if she will disclose it to
anybody, he will disclose the occurrence to her husband. After
this, the petitioner started establishing physical relationship
regularly with the informant and has also taken Rupees Four Lakh
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15951 of 2026(3) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
for purchasing land from her. One day, the informant denied for
establishing physical relationship. On 29.06.2024, the petitioner
arrived at the house of the informant, threatened her of dire
consequences and established physical relationship and kept video
of the act and also threatened that he will make the video viral if
she disclose it to somebody. It is alleged that the petitioner has
given the video to one Suman Devi who has made the video viral.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that first
foreceful physical relationship was established by the petitioner
on 03.03.2023 and last was established on 29.06.2024, whereas
this case has been filed on 25.10.2024; the delay is not explained.
Only it has been stated that due to public shame, the informant has
not filed the case earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
further submitted that actually he has handed over cash to the
informant and when he has demanded the cash, she has filed this
case. As far as making the video viral is concerned, it has been
submitted that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that the
allegation is that the video was handed over to one Suman Devi
and from there it was made viral. During course of investigation,
the mobile of Suman Devi was not seized rather the informant has
given a video in pendrive which was collected by the I.O. and the
case is based on that video which is received by the I.O. from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15951 of 2026(3) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
video which has been received in pendrive by I.O. cannot prove
that from which source the video was made viral or released.
Regarding other allegations it has been submitted that the delay
speaks a lot.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
counsel for the informant and he has stated that during course of
investigation the supervising authority have repeatedly directed
the I.O. to collect the mobile of Suman Devi but the I.O. has not
collected the source of video and has filed chargesheet.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned
A.C.J.M.- 1st Muzaffarpur in connection with Kudhani P.S. Case
No.207 of 2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…