Patna High Court
Sunil Tanti @ Sunil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Sunil Tanti and Kiran Devi, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 356(2), 294(2), 308(2), 64(1) and 3(5) of the Bihar Nirbhaya (Sexual Offences) Act, 2023. The prosecution alleges that Sunil Tanti captured nude photographs and a video of a woman via Instagram, threatened to circulate them on social media and to her relatives, and demanded Rs.50,000 as extortion. The petitioners contend that the allegations are fabricated, they have clean antecedents, and no such incident ever occurred. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences. Considering the gravity of the accusations, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail, concluding that the petitioners could not be afforded the privilege of protection at this stage.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances of alleged voyeurism, extortion and threats to disseminate nude material.
- Whether the allegations under the Bihar Nirbhaya (Sexual Offences) Act, 2023, constitute a serious offence warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- extortion
- voyeurism
- sexual offences
- social media
- false allegations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91440 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
1. Sunil Tanti @ Sunil Kumar S/o- Late Naresh Tanti R/v- Milkichak-2, Ps-
New Ramnagar Dist- Munger
2. Kiran Devi W/o- Late Naresh Tanti R/v- Milkichak-2, Ps- New Ramnagar
Dist- Munger
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suresh Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Digha P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 356(2), 294(2), 308(2), 64(1) and
3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that she
came in contact with Sunil Tanti on Instragram and thereafter
she started talking with the accused. She further alleged that
Sunil Tanti captured her nude photographs on the mobile phone
and thereafter he sent the said video on her mobile phone and
pressurized her to establish physical relationship, failing which
he will made the video viral on social media sites and also share
the same to her relatives. It is further allleged that when she
contacted Kiran Devi (the mother of the accused) and requested
her to ask her son to delete those photos and videos, upon which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91440 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/2
which she made demand of Rs.50,000/- and when she refused to
pay the money, her nude photos and videos were made viral by
the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. The entire
prosecution story is false, fabricated and concocted. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that no occurrence as alleged
has ever taken place. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1
and the informant was in contact with each other since 2022.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of
anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the fact that there is a serious
allegation against the petitioners of capturing nude photographs
and videos of informant on the mobile phone and threatening
her to make it viral on social media sites and also sharing the
same to her relatives and further demanding an extortion of
Rs.50,000/-, the Court is not inclined to grant privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U
Checking your session…