2026:JHHC:12752 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2488 of 2026 Siddharth Kumar, aged about 23 years, Son of Bhola Lohra … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Sonal Sodhani, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP --- 05/30.04.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2025 in connection with Latehar Cyber P.S. Case No. 11 of 2025 corresponding to Special POCSO Case No. 6 of 2026, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 74, 78(2), 79, 351(3), 356(3) of BNS and Sections 67, 67(A) of the I.T. Act and Sections 8, 12 & 14 of POCSO Act pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Latehar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. However, the charge has already been framed on 30.01.2026 and as per the allegation the case has been instituted on the basis of written application alleging that the sister of the informant and the petitioner are friends in Instagram and the petitioner threatened and pressurize the sister of the informant and asked her to send photos and later on when she denied to talk, the petitioner made viral those photographs through his Instagram portal to the friends and relative of informant’s sister. It is also alleged that the petitioner also tried to threaten the sister of the informant when she was going to college and tried to outrage her modesty and threatened her to commit rape. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has referred to the order dated 08.04.2026 and has submitted that it 2026:JHHC:12752 2 was indicated by the learned counsel of the petitioner on that day that the petitioner is not a Instagram user and in the counter affidavit the materials have been placed on record which indicate that it was the petitioner who was the user of the Instagram account through which the photos/videos have been made viral. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner and it has also been found that the petitioner was the Instagram user through which the alleged obscene photographs of the victim has been made viral, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. 6. The instant bail application is accordingly rejected. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 30.04.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-04.05.2026