##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3027/2022

Naresh Rastogi Son Of Ganga Datt Rastogi, Resident Of 277 B Housing Board A, Dharuheda, Rewari , Hariyana.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

2. Victim ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

16/04/2026

1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned FIR No.109/2021 registered with the Police Station Mahila Thana Bhiwadi, Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 354D, 376 and

379 IPC and the entire proceedings arising out of the same.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix is a major lady and she was working with the petitioner and there was some dispute pertaining to a flat and this fact has been verified by the Investigating Agency while submitting the conclusion report before the concerned Court. Counsel further submits that prior to lodging of the impugned FIR, a complaint was submitted by the prosecutrix against the petitioner on 10.11.2020, wherein allegation of rape was mentioned and the said complaint was withdrawn by her on the very same day i.e. on 10.11.2020.

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 01:28:29 PM)

(Downloaded on 25/04/2026 at 08:24:57 AM)

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-3027/2022]

Counsel submits that now concocting a complete false story, the prosecutrix has lodged the impugned FIR against the petitioner, wherein allegations of sexual assault have been levelled against him, as if the petitioner was committing the alleged offence with her since 2015. Counsel submits that on account of the dispute pertaining to a flat the entire story has been falsely cooked and the instant case is a case of blackmailing, hence, interference of

this Court is warranted.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that after thorough investigation in the instant matter, the Police has submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner finding a prima facie case against him and thereafter, cognizance has also been taken against the petitioner, hence, interference of this Court

is not warranted and the present petition is liable to be rejected.

4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and

perused the material available on the record.

5. Perusal of the impugned FIR and the allegations levelled therein reveal commission of a cognizable offence. The correctness of the allegations cannot be examined and adjudged by this Court at this stage while exercising inherent powers contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer, who has already found prima facie case against the petitioner and that is why, charge-sheet has been submitted before the concerned Court and based on the same cognizance has already been taken against the petitioner for

the above stated offences.

6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner is at liberty to take all available defence and grounds, which have been

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 01:28:29 PM)

(Downloaded on 25/04/2026 at 08:24:57 AM)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-3027/2022]

taken before this Court and in the instant petition at the

appropriate stage of the trial.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending

applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

KuD/13

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 01:28:29 PM)

(Downloaded on 25/04/2026 at 08:24:57 AM)