[2026:RJ-JP:28278] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 769/2023 URN: CRLMP / 1457U / 2023 Amit Mishra S/o Satish Kumar Mishra, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Gurudwara Road, Bajrang Colony, Dist. Dholpur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Xxxx ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Satish Kumar Khandal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Dhakar, PP Mr. Atar Singh with Mr. Aman Pareek JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/07/2026 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, [2026:RJ-JP:28278] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-769/2023] on priority and decide the same expeditiously without deferring the hearings to subsequent dates. 3. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned FIR No.50/2023, registered with the Police Station Christianganj, District Ajmer for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 313 and 506 IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix is a major lady and she was in a consensual relationship with the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the petitioner never made any promise to her to solemnize marriage with her. Counsel submits that a huge sum of money was transferred into the account of the prosecutrix by the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the WhatsApp chats between the parties indicate that there was no promise at the instance of the petitioner to perform marriage with the prosecutrix. At a later point of time, a false story has been concocted by the prosecutrix and the petitioner has been falsely booked in the instant case. Hence, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned FIR and the entire proceedings arising out of the same. 5. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Naim Ahamed vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2023) 15 SCC 385. Counsel submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Naim Ahamed (supra) has held that even breach of promise of marriage does not amount to an offence under Section 376 IPC. Hence, the impugned FIR be quashed. [2026:RJ-JP:28278] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-769/2023] 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposed the prayer. 7. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 8. Perusal of the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR reveals commission of cognizable offence. The correctness of the allegations cannot be examined or adjudged by this Court while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage, this Court is not expected to look into the defence of the accused, which has been produced before this Court in the form of WhatsApp chats and financial transactions between the petitioner and the prosecutrix. 9. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant misc. petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to take all available defence at the appropriate stage of the trial before the Trial Court. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/10