[2026:RJ-JP:16690] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.7442/2022 Sitaram Son Of Sawatram, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Amavara, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawaimadhopur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Victim ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Pachauri For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore Mr. Shubham Sain JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/04/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned FIR No.135/2022 registered with the Police Station Soorwal, District Sawai Madhopur for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 376 (2)(n) IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no offence has been committed by the petitioner and he has been falsely booked in the instant case by the complainant with an ulterior motive to harass him, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that after thorough investigation in the instant matter, prima facie role of the petitioner was found to be proved for the above stated offences. Since the accused-petitioner was absconding, hence [2026:RJ-JP:16690] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-7442/2022] warrants under Section 37 of the Rajasthan Police Act were issued and thereafter the evidence of the witnesses were recorded and charge-sheet was submitted against him under Section 299 Cr.P.C. in his absence on 20.03.2023 before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Sawai Madhopur, 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. The correctness of the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR cannot be examined by this Court under its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer, who has already found prima facie involvement of the petitioner for the offences alleged. 6. Looking to the fact that the petitioner is absconding since the date of registration of the impugned FIR that is why warrants were issued by the Investigating Officer under Section 37 of the Rajasthan Police Act and when the petitioner was not found to be traceable, then, the evidence of the witnesses have been recorded in his absence and charge-sheet under Section 299 Cr.P.C. has already been submitted in his absence. Hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief as sought for in the present petition. 7. In view of the above, the criminal misc. petition stands dismissed. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/86