[2026:RJ-JP:12815] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4582/2020 Mohan Lal S/o Sh. Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Sarthal, PS Sarthal, Distt. Baran, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through its PP 2. Victim W/o Parmanand, Aged 34 years, R/o Ward No. 14, In front of lifeline hospital, Aklera, Police Station, Aklera, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saransh Saini, Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Mr. Neeraj Kumar Pal, Ms. Ayushi Singh, Ms. Sanjana Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/03/2026 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, on priority and decide the same expeditiously without deferring the hearings to subsequent dates. [2026:RJ-JP:12815] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-4582/2020] 3. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing the impugned FIR No.58/2019 registered at the Police Station Chhabra, District Baran, for the offences punishable under Section(s) 376, 511 IPC & 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act along with the entire proceedings arising out of the same including the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 149/2019 pending before the Court of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Baran. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix “L” is a major lady aged 34 years and she is in habit of lodging similar kinds of complaints/FIRs against several persons wherein, allegations of either attempt to rape or commission of rape have been levelled. He further submits that the FIR No. 39/2020 registered with the Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar is an example of the same. 5. Counsel further submits that in fact no offence of rape or forceful sexual intercourse has taken place as per the statements of the prosecutrix “L” as well as the statements of her husband. Counsel submits that the prosecutrix “L” travelled with the petitioner on the fateful day at several places starting from Kota to Aklera, Kawai, Gugore, Chhabra and finally Hotel Hill View at Chhabra. Counsel further submits that under these circumstances, the instant case may be a case of consent but not a case of rape. He further submits that as per the statement of the Hotel Manager and hotel employee, Mr. Ankit Rajak, the prosecutrix “L” came with the petitioner in his hotel and made the payment at her own, thereafter, they stayed in a room and while returning she started quarreling with him, hence, the booking amount paid for the room [2026:RJ-JP:12815] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-4582/2020] was refunded to her. Counsel submits that under these circumstances no offence has been committed, hence, the entire proceedings of the impugned FIR and the criminal case be quashed. 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that in the instant case, wherein allegations of rape have been levelled against the petitioner by the prosecutrix “L” in her statements which were recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and after collecting evidence against the petitioner, charge-sheet has already been submitted against him under Section 376 IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act before the Court of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Baran in the year 2019 and cognizance has already been taken against him for the above stated offences. Counsel further submits that since the accused is absconding and the proceedings under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. have already been initiated against him. Hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted and the instant criminal misc. petition is liable to be rejected. 7. Heard and considered the submissions made at the bar and perused the material available on record. 8. Perusal of the statements of the prosecutrix “L” recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. along with the allegations levelled in the FIR reveals commission of cognizable offence, the correctness of the allegations levelled therein cannot be examined or adjudged by this Court at this stage, while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer, who has already found prima facie case against the petitioner. Accordingly, charge-sheet [2026:RJ-JP:12815] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-4582/2020] has already been submitted before the competent Court for the above stated offences and thereafter cognizance has also be taken against him. 9. This Court, after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant criminal misc. petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to take all available grounds and defence, which have been taken before this Court in the instant misc. petition to be taken before the Trial Court, at the appropriate stage of the trial. 10. Looking to the fact that the arrest warrants issued against the petitioner were issued by this Court in the year 2019, the interim orders would remain in operation till apperance of the petitioner before the Trial Court, in case the petitioner appears and surrenders before the Trial Court on or before 27.04.2026 and before that he shall be released on bail subject to furnishing of personal bond and surety bond as well as subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. In case the petitioner fails to appear before the Trial Court on or before 27.04.2026 and remains absconding, then this order will not have any bearing and the Trial Court would be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 11. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Shivam-Puneet/4