[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Aman Rajak vs State Of Odisha And Another on 12 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.851 of 2025
Aman Rajak .... Appellant(s)
Mr. Karunakar Gaya, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Respondent(s)
Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, AGA
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
12.01.2026
Order No. I.A. No.1942 of 2025
02. 1. This is an application for bail.
2. Heard.
3. The appellant-petitioner has been convicted for the
offences under Sections 292(2)(a)/500/506 of the I.P.C. read with
Section 12/14 of the POCSO Act and Section 66(C)/66(E)/67/67(B)
of the I.T. Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of six
months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of three months for the
offence under Section 292(2)(a) of the I.P.C., to undergo S.I. for a
period of six months for the offence under Section 500 of I.P.C., to
undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under Section 506 of
I.P.C., to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-
(rupees three thousand), in default to undergo R.I. for a period of
six months for the offence under Section 12 of the POCSO Act, to
undergo R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees
ten thousand), in default to undergo R.I. for six months for the
offence under Section 14 of the POCSO Act, to undergo R.I. for
two years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in
default to undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under Section
66(C) of the I.T. Act, to undergo R.I. for a period of two years for
the offence under Section 66(E) of the I.T. Act and to undergo R.I.
for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand),
in default to undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under
Section 67 of the I.T. Act and to undergo R.I. for two years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to
undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under Section 67(B) of
the I.T. Act and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under
POCSO Act, Jagatsinghpur in Special G.R. Case No.73 of 2021
(Trial No.01/2022).
4. Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submits that
during trial, although the petitioner was arrested, he was admitted to
bail within three days of his arrest. On 16.07.2025, when the
impugned judgment was pronounced, he was taken into custody.
Since then, he is in custody. The petitioner is 22 years old boy, who
has faced the trial and has been convicted.
5. During trial, the victim was examined as P.W.3. At the
time of examination of the said witness, she was 20 years of age.
She in her deposition has stated that she becomes friend with the
petitioner through Snapchat and their relationship continued for
about one year. Thereafter, the petitioner allegedly demanded nude
photographs and, upon her refusal, threatened to commit suicide.
Out of fear, she sent some nude photographs to the petitioner.
Subsequently, the petitioner again demanded further nude
photographs. She further stated that on 01.01.2021, the petitioner
deleted certain family photographs from Snapchat and thereafter
showed disinterest in her. She also deposed that on 2nd January to
9th January, 2021, she received calls from unknown numbers
informing her that her nude photographs and videos had gone viral
on Snapchat. She informed the same to her father, who in turn on
10th January, 2021 made an online complaint. Subsequently, at the
instance of the Cyber Police/Crime Branch, Cuttack, the photos and
videos were deleted from the Snapchat and Instagram account. She
further deposed that she had not disclosed to her father that she had
shared nude photographs with the petitioner, as she was scared, and
therefore continued to remain in contact with him. She stated that
the petitioner again demanded nude photographs and videos and
threatened her, due to which she again sent further such
photographs. She further stated that on 04.11.2021, between 6.00
P.M. and 7.00 P.M. on the occasion of Diwali, the petitioner sent
the nude photographs and videos to her father's mobile phone.
Therefore, on 15.11.2021, her father made a complaint before the
Cyber Crime, Cuttack. The said witness was subjected to extensive
cross-examination. In the cross-examination, she admitted that she
was in a relationship with the accused and that the photographs and
videos were sent by her voluntarily.
6. From the record, it prima facie appears that both the
appellant and the victim were minors and were involved in a
consensual relationship. The facts indicate a case of adolescent
romance, which is clearly distinguishable from instances of
coercive or exploitative sexual abuse.
Further, the recent observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anurudh & Anr.1 assume significance.
The Hon'ble Apex Court, taking judicial notice of the recurring
2026 INSC 47
misuse of the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act in cases
involving consensual adolescent relationships, has recommended
that the legislature consider the introduction of a "Romeo-Juliet"
clause to distinguish genuine consensual relationships from sexual
abuse. Such observations lend persuasive support to the grant of
bail in the present case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as
follows:
Considering the fact that repeated judicial notice has been
taken of the misuse of these laws, let a copy of this judgment
be circulated to the Secretary, Law, Government of India, to
consider initiation of steps as may be possible to curb this
menace inter alia, the introduction of a Romeo - Juliet clause
exempting genuine adolescent relationships from the
stronghold of this law; enacting a mechanism enabling the
prosecution of those persons who, by the use of these laws
seeks to settle scores etc.
Therefore, during the pendency of the present appeal, I feel
it apt to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
7. Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail in the
aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty
thousand) with one local solvent surety for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court subject to condition that he
shall not indulge in any criminal activities in any manner and any
other conditions to be imposed by the learned trial Court deem fit
and proper .
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of the bail.
8. The I.A. is disposed of accordingly.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Order No.
04. 1. List this matter after four weeks before the assigned
Bench.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 13-Jan-2026 19:03:39
