Jharkhand High Court
Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 12358 of 2021
-------
Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Singh ...... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... .... Opp. Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwar, A.P.P
--------
(Through Video Conferencing)
03/ Dated 15.12.2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Case diary, earlier called for, has been received. Perused the same.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Cyber Crime P.S.
Case No.17 of 2021, for the offence under Sections 354, 354-A, 354-B, 509, 500
of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66-E, 67, 67 (a) of the I.T Act, pending in
the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj.
It was submitted that the offence alleged is triable by the court of
Magistrate and is punishable for the maximum period of three years. It was also
submitted that the photographs were made viral by wife of this petitioner, with
whom, he was having strained relationship. Accordingly the petitioner may be
released on bail.
It is alleged that the prosecutrix was having affairs with the petitioner prior
to her marriage. Intimate moments of their relationship including her nude
pictures were photographed by the petitioner. Prosecutrix married else were.
Petitioner blackmailed her to resume their earlier relationship. On her refusal,
obscene photographs were made viral on the social media and were also sent to
her relatives including her in-laws. It appalled the entire family. Every
relationship has an element of trust. Apart from the offenses allegedly committed,
act of the petitioner was sheer breach of trust of their relationship.
Considering the facts of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner,
on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
Before parting, it is pertinent to mention that on perusal of the case diary,
it transpired that the photographs which were made viral have been incorporated
as its part. Undoubtedly the photographs so collected during investigation have
important bearing on the merit of the case, but revealing them in the case diary
was not in a good taste. It would have been prudent on the part of the
investigating officer to enclose the photographs in sealed cover for perusal of the
court(s). For that matter the officer who had supervised this case was also not
sensitive enough to guide the Investigating officer on this point.
Time and again, through various judicial pronouncements Superior courts
have emphasized not to incorporate the name of victim of sexual offence in
judicial orders or judgments as it will malign her reputation in the eyes of those
who will have access to them. Making these photographs part of the case diary
will cause much more consternation to the prosecutrix as the case diary will fall in
hands of different stakeholders of the judicial process including advocate clerks
and court staffs.
This Court is not imputing any malicious intention on the part of the
Investigating Officer. Due to sheer lack of sensitivity towards the right of privacy
of a lady, this breach has occurred.
The Registrar General of this court is directed to forward a copy of this
order to the Director General of Police, Jharkhand to explore the possibility of
initiating training programs for sensitizing police officers on this issue.
BS/ (Ambuj Nath, J.)
