Court emphasizes the extraordinary nature of anticipatory bail amid serious allegations of privacy violations and blackmail through social media.
In a significant judgment, the Jharkhand High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Vijay Kumar Srivastav, accused of misusing social media to compromise the dignity and privacy of an individual. The case involved serious allegations of creating fake social media accounts, disseminating objectionable photographs, and threatening the informant.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, presiding over the case, highlighted the extraordinary nature of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, now corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He emphasized that such discretion should be exercised sparingly, especially in cases involving serious allegations and evidence that could impede investigation and harm public interest.
The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Srivastav, was accused of exploiting his relationship with the informant, sending objectionable photographs to her workplace, and demanding money with threats of circulating obscene images. Despite arguments from the petitioner's counsel about a consensual relationship, the court found substantial evidence of social media misuse and threats, including the creation of fake email and Instagram accounts to defame the informant.
The judgment underscored the court's stance that friendship or relationship does not entitle a person to compromise another's privacy and dignity. It pointed out that the allegations were supported by evidence from WhatsApp chats and witness statements, further solidifying the case against the petitioner.
The court referred to previous judgments by the Supreme Court, stressing that the power to grant anticipatory bail should not be exercised routinely and must consider the public interest and the seriousness of the allegations. In this case, the court determined that granting bail would likely obstruct the investigation.
This judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's commitment to upholding privacy and dignity in the digital age, where misuse of social media can lead to severe consequences for the victims.
The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed, and an interim order from October 2025 was vacated, leaving Srivastav to face the legal proceedings without pre-arrest bail protection.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of CrPC (corresponding to Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is an extraordinary remedy and should be exercised sparingly, especially in cases involving allegations of misuse of social media to compromise the dignity and privacy of an individual.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482, Information Technology Act, 2000 Sections 66C, 66D, 67, 67A, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 438.
