Back
Orders of Man Accused of Blackmailing Woman With Obscene Photos
In a striking order, the has directed the Chief Medical Officer of Kaushambi to conduct a of a man accused of persistently blackmailing a woman with her obscene photographs and videos, observing that he does not appear to be a person of . The Court, while refusing to grant bail, was confronted with a disturbing record of threatening messages and social media posts that revealed the extent of the alleged harassment.
A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal passed the order on , while hearing a filed by Rahul Kumar Saroj in connection with Case Crime No. 41 of 2026, registered under Sections 64(1), 74, 351(2), 352, and 333 of the , along with Sections 3/4 of the and Section 66E of the , at , District Kaushambi.
A History of Alleged Harassment Across Two FIRs
The case traces back to , when the victim first approached the police, lodging FIR No. 430 of 2025. She alleged that Saroj had somehow obtained her obscene photographs by hacking her mobile phone and subsequently used those images to and threaten her on social media. The police arrested him in connection with that case. However, upon securing bail, Saroj allegedly resumed his campaign of intimidation, leading to the second FIR that formed the basis of the present .
According to the prosecution, Saroj did not merely threaten the victim—he went further, posting obscene photographs and videos on social media, sending filthy messages, and demanding a sum of ₹5 lakhs as consideration for deleting the compromising material. The victim, in her statements recorded under , acknowledged a prior romantic relationship with the applicant but maintained that he exploited her trust to extract and weaponize her private content.
Competing Arguments in Court
Appearing for the applicant, argued that the victim was in a consensual relationship with Saroj and that the case was a fabrication born out of his refusal to marry her. The defence contended that the applicant had already explained his criminal history, that a had been filed—eliminating the need for —and that Saroj, a law-abiding citizen languishing in jail since , would cooperate fully with the trial if released.
The opposition painted a starkly different picture. , counsel for the , and , learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, vehemently opposed the . They produced before the Court a damning collection of evidence recovered during investigation: messages sent by Saroj to the victim and her relatives, obscene photographs of the victim posted on social media, and letters containing threatening and vulgar language. This material, they argued, demonstrated a sustained pattern of , , and psychological torment that rendered the applicant undeserving of bail.
Court's Scrutiny of Digital Evidence
After perusing the messages, photographs, and social media posts, Justice Deshwal arrived at a firm conclusion. The Court noted that while a prior relationship between the applicant and the victim may have existed, the evidence unequivocally showed that Saroj had subsequently used obscene material to the victim and subject her to relentless harassment.
The bench was particularly troubled by the nature of the content it reviewed. The language of the messages, the character of the photographs and videos posted online, and the pattern of targeting not just the victim but also her relatives all weighed heavily against the applicant. As the order noted, the material
"shows that he had been continuously threatening and blackmailing the victim and demanding huge amount as a consideration to delete the obscene photographs and video."
Key Observations
In a passage that underscores the gravity of the allegations and raises questions about the accused's mental state, the Court observed:
"On perusal of the messages and social media post sent by the applicant, this Court found that the applicant is not a person of ; therefore, the is directed to conduct his and keep it on record of file of this case before the concerned district court."
The Court further remarked on the broader pattern of conduct:
"Considering the language and nature of messages and the nature of photographs and video posted by the applicant on social media, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail."
The Decision and Its Implications
The was rejected in its entirety. Beyond the denial of bail, the Court's directive to the Chief Medical Officer, Kaushambi, to conduct a of the applicant and place the report on the 's record is a notable development. This order reflects a judicial recognition that the alleged conduct—escalating from an intimate relationship to systematic digital and public humiliation—may warrant an assessment of the accused's mental fitness, a factor that could potentially influence subsequent proceedings.
The Registrar (Compliance) has been instructed to communicate this order to the , for immediate compliance. The case will now proceed to trial, with the applicant remaining in custody and his mental health status set to become a formal part of the .
