1 2025:CGHC:1815 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 42 of 2025 Prinshu Pandey S/o Shri Vivekanand Pandey Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 16, Patna, Police Station Patna, Tehsil- Baikunthpur, District - Koriya (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Manendragarh, District Manendragarh - Chirmiri - Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. V.K. Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.01.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 46/2023 registered at Police Station – Manendragarh, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 67 & 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.13 10:38:16 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that when the marriage of the victim was fixed, it is alleged that the present accused/applicant created an ID on Instagram and sent obscene photographs, videos, and messages to her in-laws’ house on 01.02.2023. Subsequently, on 02.02.2023, he locked the Instagram ID. It is further alleged that the applicant threatened the in-laws of the victim through video calls and mobile calls with the intent to damage her reputation and disrupt the marriage. Hence, this bail application has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. She also submits that, in fact, the Instagram account of the present applicant was hacked at the relevant time, and an unknown person, by editing photographs, sent the messages and photographs in question. The applicant was not aware of these actions. When the family members of the victim came to know about the incident, they lodged a report at Police Station Manendragarh. However, when the true facts came to light, the victim and her family requested the police not to take any action against the applicant. As a result, the police did not act on the FIR for nearly two years and did not attempt to arrest the applicant. However, all of a sudden, the police have now tried to arrest the applicant in connection with the same matter. He further submits that presently the victim has already been married and has not any grievance with the applicant and the marriage of the present applicant has also been fixed on 06.02.2025. Therefore he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submits that the present accused/applicant created an ID on Instagram and sent obscene photographs, videos, and messages to her in-laws’ house on 01.02.2023 and also threatened the in-laws of the victim through video calls and mobile calls with the intent to damage her reputation and disrupt the marriage, therefore he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case and further the fact that in fact, the Instagram account of the present applicant was hacked at the relevant time, and an unknown person, by editing photographs, sent the messages and photographs in question and the applicant was not aware of these actions, when the family members of the victim came to know about the incident, they lodged a report at Police Station Manendragarh, however, when the true facts came to light, the victim and her family requested the police not to take any action against the applicant, as a result, the police did not act on the FIR for nearly two years and did not attempt to arrest the applicant, however, all of a sudden, the police have now tried to arrest the applicant in connection with the same matter and further the fact that presently the victim has already been married and has not any grievance with the applicant and the marriage of the present applicant has also been fixed on 06.02.2025., therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Prinshu Pandey, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan