Patna High Court – Orders
Anup Shankar Sahay vs The State Of Bihar on 5 June, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66193 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna
======================================================
Anup Shankar Sahay S/o- Shri Abhay Shankar Sahay Resident of flat no 301
Raghunandan lok Anuragh narayan P.S- Kadankuan, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. C.B.I. Patna/Delhi Patna/Delhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vishal Vikram Rana, Advocate
Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate
Ms. Misha Bharti, Advocate
Mr. Zeeshan Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
8 05-06-2025
Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and
Learned Counsel for the State.
2. No one appears on behalf of the CBI in this case
but the In-charge Public Prosecutor for the State of Bihar with
the help of counter affidavit filed by the CBI has argued this
case after permission granted by this Court.
3. The present criminal miscellaneous application
no.66193 of 2024 has been filed under Sections 483 and 484 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the BNSS, 2023’) for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner who is in custody in connection with Special
(POSCSO) Case No.151 of 2024, arising out of RC-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66193 of 2024(8) dt.05-06-2025
2/6
04(S)/2024/CBI/ SC- III/ ND lodged on 10.06.2024, under
Section 67B of the I.T. Act and Section 120B of the Indian
Penal Code.
4. As per the prosecution, the allegation against the
petitioner is that the user of Mobile Nos.+918789741011 and
+919708747437 and e-mail Id- [email protected] and
[email protected] i.e. Anup Shankar Sahay, the petitioner and
other accused are alleged to have involved in sexual abuse of
minor in publishing/ collection/ transmission/strong material
depicting children in sexually explicit act in electronic form
over the internet and in this way the allegation of commission of
an offence under Section 67B of the IT Act read with Section
120B of the IPC and substantive offence has been alleged in the
FIR. Subsequently, the Govt. of Bihar through its Home
Department have accorded requisites under Section 6 and 5 of
the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 respectively to
CBI for investigation of the said case and thereafter a regular
case is registered against the petitioner and one other co-
accused.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has
been wrongly implicated in the present case. Counsel submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66193 of 2024(8) dt.05-06-2025
3/6
that petitioner was in no way connected with the said offence.
The allegation levelled against the petitioner is completely false
and fabricated as there is no evidence to support the claim of the
prosecution. It has been alleged that the petitioner and other co-
accused have conspired together. Counsel submits that petitioner
has no prior contact or knowledge about the co-accused. He is in
judicial custody since 19.06.2024. It has nowhere specified in
the FIR that he has committed sexual assault against the minor.
It has been submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that
petitioner is in custody in complete violation of petitioners right
to life and liberty as he has been arrested on the basis of
information derived from undisclosed source and prosecution
under serious offence of POCSO Act made against him is a
sheer abuse of the process of law. Counsel submits that
petitioner is self-esteemed person and there is no stigma against
the accused throughout his life. He is ready to cooperate in the
investigation. Counsel further submits that petitioner undertakes
that he would keep himself away from minor victim and will not
in any way cause any impediment in the continuation of the
investigation. Counsel submits that in the statement under
section 164 of Cr.PC the minor has named one Umesh Shah in
whose house the mother of the victim was working. Counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66193 of 2024(8) dt.05-06-2025
4/6
submits that under Section 161 of Cr.PC, the name of the
petitioner has come but under Section 164 of Cr.PC victim has
taken name of one Umesh Shah. He further submits that it has
falsely been alleged that the victim has been sexually exploited
since 2021, there was no information or complaint made by the
police or anyone else and it has come only through the CBI.
Counsel further submits that petitioner is ready to cooperate in
the investigation. It has also been submitted by the Counsel that
petitioner has strong medical ground for consideration of bail on
medical ground. It is stated that the right hand of the petitioner
does not work properly from last several years. He has severe
pain in the back/waist and knee so much that once seated he can
not stand. The petitioner is under specialized treatment for
glaucoma and needs medical care of specialist doctor to treat his
ailment of the eye. Counsel further submits that due to
inadvertent mistake the doctor’s report though attached in the
writ petition but could not be mentioned in the pleading. He
submits that from the doctor’s report it transpires that medicine
of glaucoma is going on continuously. Counsel submits that the
age of the petitioner is 68 years. He is old aged person and in a
deep rooted conspiracy his name has figured in this case.
Counsel submits that his age may be taken into consideration
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66193 of 2024(8) dt.05-06-2025
5/6
and a sympathetical view may be taken against the petitioner.
6. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposes
the bail application and submits that in this case a counter
affidavit has been filed on behalf of the CBI wherein it has
stated that during investigation the named email ID mentioned
in the FIR was being operated by the accused petitioner using
seized mobile handsets. The multimedia file is stored in google
photo of e-mail ID were checked and ten media files were found
available in the google photo with regard to child sexual abuse
material. Counsel for the State further submits that on the basis
of statement of victim, Section 8 read with Sections 7, 10, 9 (1),
12, 11(II)(IV) and 14 and 13 of the POCSO Act, 2012 were
added in this case in addition to the case lodged under Section
IT Act and Indian Penal Code. Counsel for State further submits
that in para-18 of the counter affidavit it has been categorically
mentioned by the CBI that after conclusion of the investigation
chargesheet under Sections 8, 7, 10, 9(1), 12, 11(II)(V), 14 and
13 of the POCSO Act read with Section 67B of the IT Act has
been filed. Cognizance has been taken and prosecution evidence
has started. He submits that examination of some of the
prosecution witnesses has taken place. Counsel also submits that
during investigation the child sexual abuse material of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66193 of 2024(8) dt.05-06-2025
6/6
victim is available in the mobile phone of the accused in the
form of video/images.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, the bail
application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
8. However, considering his old age, this Court only
grants liberty that if the trial shall not be concluded within one
year from today then petitioner shall be at liberty to move for
regular bail.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
shikha/-
U T