Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Circulating Woman’s Indecent Photos On WhatsApp

The accused had been arrested in January 2025 and was charged underneath a number of provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (Sections 74, 352, and 351(2)), Part 64(1) of the BNS, and Part 67A of the Info Expertise Act, 2000. He allegedly circulated the sufferer’s intimate photographs via WhatsApp, prompting his arrest. After his bail utility was rejected by the trial courtroom in April 2025, the accused approached the Excessive Courtroom searching for aid.

A Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot held, “Digital expertise is altering the face of crime. Indecent footage of an individual when circulated on public platforms by social media can destroy lives. That is the onerous social actuality.”

Advocate Satyam Mishra appeared for the Petitioner.

The Excessive Courtroom famous, “The indecent images of the sufferer had been circulated by the applicant on whats app. Among the photographs had been recovered and despatched for examination earlier than the FSL. The FSL report is awaited. The offence is grave. There’s chance that the applicant had dedicated the offence. At this stage, no case for bail is made out.”

Given the severity of the accusations and the potential societal injury attributable to the digital dissemination of indecent content material, the Courtroom refused to grant bail.

Whereas denying the bail plea, the Courtroom took measures to guarantee a immediate judicial course of. The Courtroom stated that the trial have to be concluded ideally inside one 12 months from the date of receipt of a licensed copy of the order. It directed, “The realized District Decide is directed to take weekly experiences of the progress of the trial. The involved Deputy Director, Forensic Science Laboratory to make sure that the FSL report is produced earlier than the trial courtroom inside a interval of two months.”

The Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj has been directed to file an affidavit earlier than the trial courtroom on the standing of warrant and summons execution.

Additional, the trial courtroom and counsels had been instructed to adhere to instructions issued in Noor Alam v. State of U.P. regarding the continuation of trial proceedings throughout strikes to stop undue delays.

If police fail to adjust to the Courtroom’s directives, the trial courtroom has been licensed to hunt affidavits from the related Senior Superintendent of Police and take acceptable authorized motion, together with summoning officers in particular person.

Trigger Title: Ramdev v. State of U.P., [2025:AHC:94437]

Look:

Petitioner: Advocates Satyam Mishra, Shailendra Singh