ORDER :

1. The present misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 216/2020, registered at Police Station Kuchera, Distt. Nagaur for offence under Sections 450 , 354, 384, 376, 504 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Act.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 2 submitted a written report before the SHO, Police Station Kuchera stating inter alia therein that she and her husband-Sewa Ram are residing in the field of one Shripal Manda at village Dhadhariya Khurd in a hut and they do agricultural work there. She stated that on 16.11.2020 around 7.30 to 9.00pm, Kumbha Ram (petitioner) came to her dhani. At that time, she was alone and when she asked him the reason of coming, he told her that since her husband is out of town, he has come to have sex with her. She objected the same but the accused had toren her cloths and committed rape with her. Accused also abused her by using filthy caste oriented language. It was further alleged that accused also threatened her for dire consequences if she would disclose the incident to anyone. It was also stated in the complaint that the delay in submitting the report was because the accused was threatening to kill her and her family members and therefore, she was scared. On the basis of this report, the police registered an FIR for offence under Sections 450 , 354, 384, 376, 504 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, on three occasions, the police investigated the case thoroughly and had come to a conclusion that no offence was made out against the petitioner. Now, the investigation has been handed over to CID (CB) under the pressure of political person and the fourth Investigating Officer is investigating the matter. It is argued that the Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan has issued a Circular dated 06.01.2019, in which, the repeated change of investigation has been disapproved and it has been stipulated in the said Circular that investigation of one case shall not be transferred more than three times under any circumstances. Learned counsel further argued that there is delay in lodging the FIR. The occurrence, as alleged by the prosecutrix, took place on 16.11.2020, whereas the FIR was lodged on 01.12.2020 i.e. after about 14 days of the incident. This delay has not at all been explained satisfactorily by the prosecutrix. In these circumstances, the impugned FIR registered against the petitioner may be quashed. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shishpal v. State of Raj. & Anr. [S.B.Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4966/2022], decided on 14.09.2022.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that earlier, the investigation was not conducted in proper manner and for a just decision in the matter, the Director General of Police has directed for re-investigation. Looking to the nature of offence, the FIR may not be quashed.

5. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and carefully gone through material available on record as well as case-diary and impugned notice.

6. The prosecutrix specifically mentioned in the FIR as well as the statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. that the petitioner committed rape with her and he also abused her by using filthy caste oriented language. According