Patna High Court
Abhishek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhishek Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case (Goraul PS Case No. 436 of 2025) involving alleged kidnapping, robbery, sexual assault, blackmail, and extortion, with charges under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 66A and 67A of the Information Technology Act. He asserted that he has a clean record, is a government servant (driver at a Community Health Center), and was falsely implicated. The State contended that the petitioner is not a government servant and that the investigation is ongoing, noting that a video of the alleged victim had gone viral showing the victim fully unveiled. The SHO and Investigating Officer, who appeared in court, corroborated the State’s position. After hearing both sides, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the petitioner’s contentions insufficient to merit the privilege, and consequently rejected the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the allegations and the status of the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 308, 308(2), 3(5)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66A, 67A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- sexual assault
- blackmail
- extortion
- video pornography
- Information Technology Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
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
3 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
Checking your session…