Patna High Court
Dinesh Pandit @ KhushiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the allegations were specific, serious, and involved offences under the B.N.S. and the IT Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Pandit, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging he created and disseminated obscene photographs and videos of an informant on social media platforms. The prosecution alleged violations of several sections of the B.N.S. and Sections 66 and 67(a) of the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended he was innocent and falsely implicated, while the State opposed bail, emphasizing the specific accusations and seriousness of the offences. The court examined the nature of the allegations, the gravity of the offences under the cited statutes, and the risk of tampering with evidence. Considering the directness of the accusations and the seriousness of the alleged crimes, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and the petitioner remains liable to arrest under the FIR.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged obscenity and cyber offences
- Whether the allegations under the B.N.S. and the Information Technology Act justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 351(3), 351(4), 352, 356(2), 75, 77, 78, 79
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66, 67(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- obscenity
- cybercrime
- Information Technology Act
- B.N.S.
- social media
- preliminary injunction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8595 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Saran
======================================================
Dinesh Pandit @ Khushi S/O Late Agan Dev Pandit R/o Mohalla Panagarh
Railway Station Near Gurudwara P.S. Kankasa District Bardhman, West
Bengal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 75, 77, 78,
79, 356(2), 352, 351(3) and 351(4) of the B.N.S. and Sections
66 and 67(a) of the I.T. Act.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this
petitioner made some obscene photographs and videos of the
informant viral on Instagram, Facebook and Whatsapp.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8595 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
with specific accusation that he made obscene photographs and
videos of the informant viral on social media.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.