The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to a man accused of sexually harassing and cyberstalking a minor girl, subject to stringent conditions including a complete ban on the use of social media platforms for one year. The Court directed that the accused would not be allowed to access or operate social media applications such as Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, Threads, ShareChat and other similar platforms during the specified period. It further clarified that any violation of the condition would result in the recall of the bail granted to him.
The case arose from an FIR registered at Mukta Prasad Nagar Police Station in Bikaner on the complaint of the victim’s father. According to the allegations, the accused had sexually harassed, stalked and subjected the minor girl to cyber-related offences. Based on these allegations, criminal proceedings were initiated under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The accused was arrested and remained in custody during the course of the investigation.
During the hearing of the bail application, the accused contended that he had been falsely implicated in the case. It was submitted on his behalf that the investigation had already been completed and the charge sheet had been filed. The defence argued that no further custodial interrogation was necessary and that continued detention was unwarranted. It was also submitted that the accused was not likely to abscond and would cooperate with the judicial process.
The prosecution and the complainant opposed the grant of bail. They argued that the allegations involved serious offences concerning the sexual harassment and cyberstalking of a minor girl and therefore required careful consideration. The Court examined the nature of the accusations, the material available on record and the stage of the proceedings before deciding the bail application.
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court decided to grant bail while imposing several strict conditions. The Court directed that the accused would not use any social media platform for a period of one year. The restriction extended not only to accounts maintained in his own name but also to any anonymous, fictitious or alternative accounts created through different mobile numbers, email addresses or identities. The Court made it clear that any use of social media during the restricted period would constitute a violation of the bail conditions and could lead to cancellation of bail.
The Court also imposed conditions preventing the accused from contacting the victim or her family members either directly or indirectly. The order prohibited communication through any medium, including social media platforms, messaging services, telephone calls or any other form of digital or personal interaction. These restrictions were imposed to ensure that the victim and her family remained protected from any form of interference, intimidation or further harassment while the case remained pending.
In its order, the Court took note of the increasing role of digital platforms in cases involving cyberstalking, online harassment and similar offences. The conditions imposed by the Court were intended to address concerns arising from the alleged misuse of social media while balancing the accused’s right to liberty with the need to safeguard the interests of the victim. By restricting access to social media, the Court sought to minimize the possibility of any further online interaction or misconduct involving the accused.
The High Court ultimately allowed the bail application subject to strict compliance with all the conditions laid down in the order. It emphasized that the prohibition on using social media and the restriction against contacting the victim or her family were mandatory conditions of release. The Court warned that any breach of these conditions would have serious consequences and could result in the withdrawal of the relief granted. The order thus combined the grant of bail with safeguards aimed at protecting the minor victim and preserving the integrity of the proceedings pending trial.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.