RAJIV SAWHNEY Vs. STATE & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Forces of nature have catapulted the human being to a position which is central to everything in this universe. Some times, human beings, by their omissions and commissions and even by indulging in abominable activities, make themselves to fall from grace.

(2.) An F.I.R No. 580/2011, registered with Police Station Rajouri, unveils one of the ugly human facets which resulted in arrest of two accused persons, namely, Shri Arun Sapotra and Shri Varun Chandan, respondents 2&3 respectively. The learned Magistrate, Rajouri, initially granted interim bail to both the accused but in terms of the impugned order, rejected the bail application of Shri Varun Chandan, respondent No.3, on whose behalf, Bail Application 43/2005 has been filed and the father of the complainant has filed this application seeking setting aside the order where under Shri Arun Sapotra, respondent No.2, has been granted bail by the learned Magistrate.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Magistrate has committed error of law and jurisdiction by allowing the application of respondent No.2. Learned counsel submitted that the offences under the Information Technology Act are continuing offences and further submitted that after the commission of offences, threats were extended to the prosecutrix and on the date the threats were extended, the respondent No.2 had ceased to be a juvenile as defined in the Jammu & Kashmir Juvenile Justice Act 1997 (for short Act of 1997). Learned counsel further submitted that the offences are of heinous and grave nature and the learned Magistrate should not have granted bail to the respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the respondent - State supported the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and prayed for setting aside of the impugned order.