[2026:RJ-JD:201]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2^nd Bail Application No. 12208/2025 Sukhvindra Singh Alias Bittu S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 35 Years, 32 Ps Police Station Raisinghnagar District Sri Ganganagar At Present Dhani Ramkuar Bhadu Chak 18 Lgw Police Station Suratgarh Sadar District Sri Ganganagar (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail Suratgarh)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. N.L. Joshi with Ms. Kirti Pareek.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

06/01/2026

1. The instant second bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS/439 Cr.P.C. who has been arrested in connection with the FIR No.143/2025 dated 04.09.2025 registered at the Police Station Suratgarh Sadar District Ganga Nagar (Sri Ganganagar) for the offence under Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and under Sections 152, 353(1)(a), 196(1)(a) 197(1)(a), 197(1)(c)

and 197(d) of BNS.

2. First bail application being SBCRLMB No.6535/2025, was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2025 with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after filing the charge-sheet. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner.

3. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are that petitioner posted video stories on Instagram ID named “bitumaan99”, which were played and watched and screen recording of the same was started on the mobile from which, videos were uploaded. In the first video story on Instagram, it could be seen that 4-5 individuals, dressed in punjabi attire, were desecrating the Indian National Flag with the knife and in the video, they can be heard saying “We stand with Pakistan, no Indian Army has guts to attack Pakistan from Punjab”.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, as in the charge-sheet, it has not been mentioned anywhere that who created the said video and the petitioner forwarded the said video to whom. He submits that the petitioner is an illiterate person and was not aware of the consequences of uploading the said video story on his Instagram ID and thus, counsel for the petitioner craves acceptance of the instant second bail application filed by the petitioner.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that it has been specifically mentioned in the charge-sheet that the petitioner had posted the said video on his Instagram ID named “bitumaan99” and it could be seen in the video that 4-5 individuals, dressed in punjabi attire, were desecrating the Indian National Flag with the knife and they could also be heard hurling profanities at the Indian Army. While drawing this Court's attention to the charge-sheet, the learned Public Prosecutor submits that the videos were uploaded on the petitioner's Instagram ID post-Pahalgam terrorist attack in Jammu & Kashmir and were viralised to other people with the intent to disrupt India's unity, integrity, sovereignty, and communal harmony, as well as to foment separatism and incite illegal activities through the said videos. Learned Public Prosecutor, thus, urges that the instant bail application may be dismissed.

6. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and also appreciating the rival submissions of counsel representing the parties, this Court is of the view that act of the petitioner by uploading and viralizing videos from his Instagram ID depicting desecration of the National Flag and anti-Army sloganeering, directly undermines national unity, especially timed post-Pahalgam terrorist attack, a period of heightened national security concerns. Such content risks inciting communal discord and separatism, as evidenced by its viral spread. The plea of illiteracy and lack of awareness made by counsel representing the petitioner, lacks merit; uplo