Regular Bail Granted for Cyber Extortion Offence Following Filing of Charge Sheet and Prolonged Custody

The applicant was arrested on 30.12.2025 in connection with Crime No. 243/2023 for allegedly recording a video call with the victim without consent and subsequently blackmailing her for money

It is further alleged that the applicant created a fake Instagram ID to upload obscene content to defame the victim and later destroyed his mobile phone and SIM card to eliminate evidence

The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, citing a prior missing person/mobile report filed by his father and asserting a previous romantic relationship with the complainant

The State opposed the bail, highlighting digital evidence from the Cyber Cell and the applicant's one prior criminal antecedent of a similar nature

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) considering the period of detention, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the nature of the allegations

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding the grant of regular bail

The judicial considerations for bail included the gravity of the offence, the period of detention, the progress of the investigation (specifically the filing of the charge-sheet), the necessity of further interrogation, and the likelihood of the trial's conclusion timeframe

Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS regarding the consequences of violating bail conditions and trial attendance

The Court weighed the serious nature of the cyber-extortion and defamation allegations against the procedural status of the case. It noted that the applicant had been in custody since 30.12.2025 and that the investigation had effectively concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet before the competent court

Although the State raised concerns regarding the applicant’s criminal antecedent and the risk of tampering, the Court observed that no further custodial interrogation was required

Recognizing that the trial was likely to be protracted, the Court determined that continued incarceration was not necessary, provided that strict conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's cooperation with the trial process and to prevent the abuse of liberty

The holding clarified that despite the gravity of the charges under Sections 384, 509(B), and 201 of the IPC and Section 67(A) of the I.T. Act, the completion of the charge-sheet and the duration of detention warranted bail. The release is subject to strict conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must attend all trial dates (specifically for framing charges and Section 351 BNSS statements), and faces immediate proceedings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNSS if bail conditions are breached