HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3816/2025 1. Kajodi Lal S/o Bhairu Lal, R/o Yadavon Ka Mohalla Khanpur Tehsil Khanpur District Jhalawar. 2. Kamal S/o Kajodi Lal, R/o Yadavon Ka Mohalla Khanpur Tehsil Khanpur District Jhalawar. 3. Purushottam S/o Kajodilal, R/o Yadavon Ka Mohalla Khanpur Tehsil Khanpur District Jhalawar. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Golu Nayak S/o Chandra Bhan, R/o Barkhera Sharola Jhalawar ( Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/11/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of the impugned FIR No.54/2025 registered with Police Station Khanpur, District Jhalawar for the offences under Sections 329(3), 324(5), 352, 351(2), 3(5), BNS, 2023 and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, or the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a civil dispute is lying pending before the Civil Court, Khanpur, but by giving the color of a criminal case, a concocted FIR based on false facts and vague allegations has been registered by the defendant-Sunil Kumar Dhakaad through his employees. Learned counsel submits (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3816/2025] that in the impugned FIR, there are no specific allegations to show in which manner the complainant was abused with casteist slurs. Unless and until, there are specific allegations of abusing with casteist slurs, no prima facie case is made out against the petitioner for registration of FIR under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act in the light of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Vaishya Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in (2023) 2 CriLR 629. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, the impugned FIR is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be rejected. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that the allegations mentioned in the FIR reveal commission of a cognizable offence, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. A bare perusal of the contents of FIR reveals the commission of a cognizable offence, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer. This Court, at this stage, cannot invoke its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 528 BNSS to adjudge the correctness of these allegations. It is a subject matter of investigation, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer. 6. Once the allegation has been levelled against the petitioner that the complainant was abused with casteist slurs, the applicability of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3816/2025] the case of Ramesh Chandra Vaishya (supra) in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be decided, at this stage, when the matter is still under investigation. 7. Considering the above, this Court cannot find no merit and substance in the instant misc. petition, hence, the same is hereby rejected. 8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Investigating Officer by way of filing a representation, who shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law. 9. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/23