2026:JHHC:18636 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5768 of 2026 Dhiraj Kumar Paswan @ Dhiraj Paswan, son of Khohi Paswan. … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. PP --- 04/25.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2026 in connection with Birni P.S. Case No.03 of 2025, registered under Sections 75/78 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and under Section 66 (E) of Information Technology Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Giridih. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegation, the petitioner forced the victim to show herself naked in video, which the petitioner recorded through the video call and thereafter the petitioner forwarded the video to one Arti Devi, who made the video viral. The learned counsel submits that Arti Devi has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.2574 of 2025 vide order dated 08.05.2025. The petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2026 and as per the impugned order, the investigation is still going on. 4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the photographs / video was made by this petitioner and sent to Arti Devi, who in turn circulated the same, have been recovered. It is further submitted that Arti Devi was granted the privilege of anticipatory bail on the ground that she is not the main accused, rather the petitioner is the main accused. There is also an allegation that the informant fell prey to the blackmail by the petitioner, due to which naked photographs/video were sent. 2026:JHHC:18636 2 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the direct and serious allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected. 6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:25.06.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:25.06.2026