HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8582/2024 1. Sona Bairwa D/o Shri Suvalal Bairwa, Aged About 20 Years, R/o -Village Manda, Tehsil Todarai Singh, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 2. Kamlesh Kumar Bairwa S/o Shri Syojiram Bairwa, Aged About 18 Years, R/o - Bairwo Ka Mohalla, Post Sindoliya, Tehsil Malpura, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. The Superintendent Of Police, Tonk, District Tonk. 3. SHO Police Station Mahendwas, District Tonk. 4. SHO Police Station Lambaharisingh, District Tonk. 5. Sualal Bairwa S/o Shri Chittar, R/o Manda, Police Station Mahendwas, District Tonk. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 16/01/2025 1. By way of filing of this misc. petition, the petitioners are seeking direction of this Court to quash the FIR No. 386/2024 registered with Police Station Mahendwas, District Tonk for the offence under Sections 137(2) and 87 of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are living in live-in-relationship and both of them are major. Counsel submits that family members of the petitioners are not happy with the said relationship. Counsel submits that on the (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8582/2024] basis of the agreement of live-in-relationship, they approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2254/2024 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 06.01.2025, granting liberty to submit appropriate application before the Nodal Officer as well as the concerned Station House Officer, and they have been further directed to look into the matter in terms of the directions issued by the Suman Meena vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.792/2024). Counsel submits that father of the petitioner No. 1 has lodged the impugned FIR, which is not sustainable, hence under these circumstances, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed and set aside. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners and submitted that FIR discloses the commission of a cognizable offence and the matter is required to be investigated by the police, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Without going into the merits of the matter and looking to the fact that the matter is at investigation stage and appropriate orders have already been passed by this Court on 06.01.2025 while deciding the S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2254/2024 submitted by the petitioners. The petitioners may approach the concerned Investigating Officer by way of filing appropriate representation. It is expected from the concerned Investigating Officer to look into the same and proceed in accordance with law. 6. The criminal misc. petition stands disposed of, accordingly. (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8582/2024] 7. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/133