HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2905/2023 Rakesh Jangid S/o Shri Manohar Lal Jangid, Aged About 32 Years, Resident of Village Ahmadpur, Police Station Akbarpur, Tehsil Malakheda, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Victim ----Complainant/Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Dharmendra Kumar & Ms.Anisha Yadav for Mr.Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr.Jitendra Rathore, PP with Mr.Gaurav Gupta, Asst. GA. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/05/2026 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, (2 of 4) [CRLMP-2905/2023] on priority and decide the same expeditiously without deferring the hearings to subsequent dates. 3. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned F.I.R. No.71/2023, registered at Police Station Akbarpur, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 & 376(2)(n) IPC & Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix ‘A’ is a major lady of the age of 21 years and she herself decided to go and stay with the petitioner at hotel at Jaipur on 24.02.2023. Meanwhile, behind her back, her father lodged a Missing Person Report (for short, “the MPR”) No.2/2023 with Police Station Akbarpur, District Alwar. Counsel submits that after investigation in the aforesaid MPR No.2/2023, the Police recover the prosecutrix and produced her before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Alwar, where her statements were recorded on 17.03.2023 and she has submitted that no offence of rape was committed upon her and she herself decided to go with the petitioner. Counsel submits that on the said date, i.e., on 17.03.2023, the custody of the prosecutrix was handed over to her father. Counsel further submits that prior to recovery of the prosecutrix on 17.03.2023, both the petitioner as well as the prosecutrix approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.483/2023 seeking protection of their life and personal liberty at the hands of the family members of the prosecutrix. Counsel submits that this Court, vide order dated 14.03.2023, passed an interim order in favour of the petitioner and the prosecutrix in the aforesaid writ (3 of 4) [CRLMP-2905/2023] petition, directing the State-respondents to ensure protection of life and personal liberty of the petitioner and the prosecutrix. 5. Counsel submits that after custody of the prosecutrix was handed over by the Sub-Divisional Officer to the father of the prosecutrix on 17.03.2023, on the very next date, i.e., on 18.03.2023, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner with the allegation that she was abducted on 24.02.2023 and rape was committed by the petitioner upon her between 14.03.2023 till 16.03.2023. Counsel submits that in the earlier MPR, when her statements were recorded, these facts were not narrated. Hence, under these circumstances, the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and fabricated and the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be rejected. 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submits that considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Police has not found any prima facie case against the petitioner. Therefore, Final Report ‘Negative’ has already been submitted in favour of the petitioner and under the changed circumstances, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with the instant petition and the same has become infructuous. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits the above factum of submission of the Final Report ‘Negative’ by the Investigating Agency, but he submits that a protest petition has been submitted against the aforesaid Final Report. 8. Considering the factual aspect of the matter that the impugned F.I.R. has resulted in Final Report ‘Negative’, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with the instant (4 of 4) [CRLMP-2905/2023] petition. Hence, the instant petition is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 9. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 10. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to assail the adverse order, if any, passed against him in the aforesaid protest petition submitted against the Final Report ‘Negative’. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma/12