Order

1. The instant misc. petition is listed before this Court in pursuance of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Kumar and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 773/2026, decided on 15.01.2026), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that in various matters, interim orders have been passed in criminal revision petitions and petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as a result of which trial relating to serious offences such as murder, rape, dacoity, dowry death, etc., could not proceed and remained stalled/held up due to the passage of considerable time.

2. Directions have been issued to this Court and other High Courts to take up such like matters which are pending since long, on priority and decide the same expeditiously without deferring the hearings to subsequent dates.

3. By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned FIR No. 44/2021 registered with the Police Station Shyam Nagar, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 313, 323, 341 & 384 IPC and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) & 3(2)(v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and a prayer has been made to quash the entire proceedings arising out of the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix is a divorced major lady aged 35 years and the petitioner is aged 26 years. They lived in a live-in-relationship for a considerable amount of time and whatever relationship has developed between them was with the consent and free will of the prosecutrix. He further submits that even an allegation of offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been levelled against the petitioner in this matter. The ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are not attracted and no such allegations have been levelled against the petitioner averring that he abused her because she belongs to a particular caste or community falling under the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as the counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposed the arguments and submitted that the offences were found to be prima facie proved against the petitioner by the Investigating Agency, therefore, charge-sheet has been submitted against him before the Competent Court of Law where charges have also been framed against him. Hence, interference of this Court is not warranted and the instant petition is liable to be rejected.

6. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

7. Perusal of the impugned FIR and the allegations levelled therein reveals commission of cognizable offence and the correctness of the allegations cannot be examined/adjudicated by this Court at this stage while exercising its powers contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Certainly this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer, who has already investigated the matter and found prima facie role of the petitioner in the above instant matter and accordingly submitted the aforementioned charge-sheet against him in the concerned Court.

8. The petitioner is at liberty to take all available grounds and defence which have been taken before this Court at the appropriate stage of the trial before the Trial Court.

9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.