Panchkula, April 17 -- A Panchkula court has denied bail to a 19-year-old Karnal resident accused of sharing sexually explicit material involving children on social media, observing that the alleged "offence strikes at the very foundation of societal morality, and the dignity and protection accorded to children." Rejecting the accused's second bail application on Wednesday, the additional sessions judge said the allegations, if proven, amount to a grave assault on minors and contribute to the perpetuation of child sexual exploitation. "The offence is not only heinous but also affects the most vulnerable section of the society, i.e., children. The larger societal interest and the need to deter such cyber offences must weigh heavily with the court," the court held. The case was registered under Section 67-B (punishment for publishing or transmitting material depicting children in sexually explicit acts in electronic form) of the Information Technology Act at the cyber crime police station, Mansa Devi Complex, on January 30 this year, after a complaint was received on cyber tipline about an an Instagram account allegedly sending child pornography to multiple users. The subscriber detail records (SDR) of the mobile phone linked to the account led the cops to the accused, a resident of Karnal. After electronic evidence and the seized device prima facie established the accused's involvement in publishing and sharing the objectionable content, he was arrested and later sent to Ambala central jail. The petitioner's counsel argued that he had been implicated and had no connection to the alleged offences. It was further submitted that he has been in custody since February 3, 2026, and as the trial is likely to take a long time, no purpose would be served by keeping him behind bars. The public prosecutor, however, opposed the bail application, stating that the allegations are grave and there is a strong likelihood of the evidence being tampered with or witnesses being influenced if the accused is allowed to walk out of jail. After hearing both sides, the court came to the conclusion that at this stage, a detailed examination of the evidence is neither warranted nor permissible. However, considering the gravity of the offence and the likelihood of repetition of the offence or tampering with electronic evidence, it is not a case fit for granting bail. If convicted, the teen could face up to five years' jail and a fine up to Rs.10 lakh. For a second or subsequent conviction, it may extend to seven years' imprisonment along with a fine up to Rs.10 lakh....