IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2540 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1435 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Patna ======================================================

Deepak Kumar, Son of Late Raj Kumar Prasad, R/o Village - Sherpur Majholiya, P.S. - Muzaffarpur, Distt. - Patna, at present R/o Manjhi Indian Bank, Chhapra, P.S. - Manjhi, Dist. - Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv.

For the Informant : Mr. Chandan Kumar Ray, Adv.

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the State : Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

3 26-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the informant. The State has been represented by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his/her arrest in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No. 1435 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 351(B)m 79, 77 and 78 of the of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) and Sections

66(C), 66(E) and 67 of the I.T. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the petitioner had abused and coerced her and her family members through different mobile numbers in order to pressurize her to solemnize marriage with him. It has been alleged that when the informant, after knowing that the petitioner is already married, stopped talking to him, whereafter the petitioner started harassing her and also posted her compromising photographs on various social media platforms. It has further been alleged that the petitioner also hired muscleman in order to threaten the family of the informant and also assaulted her brother and a similar complaint has also been lodged by the family of the informant against the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It has been submitted that the incident took place in April, 2025, whereas the written report as regards the same has been lodged on 17.06.2025, after a delay of about two months. It has further been submitted that there are contradictions in the earlier complaint lodged by the mother of the informant and the present case. It has next been submitted that the informant is in habit of filing false and frivolous cases against targeted bank employees with similar allegations. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent except one filed by the mother of the informant, viz., Samastipur Town P.S. Case No.

164 of 2025.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State as also the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and have submitted that the petitioner, on false pretext of marriage, established physical relationship with the informant and captured her objectionable photographs and videos. It has further been submitted that when the petitioner began defaming the informant in society, she filed an informatory petition before the S.D.M., Samastipur on 03.06.2024. It has, thus, been submitted that the petitioner, in view of his exploitative conduct with the informant, does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the informant had lodged cases earlier against other person also, who also happened to be the bank officials, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Let the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the concerned Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today, on his/her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amoun