IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERAAD Wednesday, the 8th day of June, 2011 Present: Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Ravi Shankar Crl.P.No. 3812 of 2011 Between: Suvvari Anil Kumar …Petitioner and The State of AP …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Crl.P.No. 3812 of 2011 O r d e r: This petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 128 of 2010 on the file of the court of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Amudalavalasa, Srikakulam District. There are ten accused in this case; but the first accused, Suvvari Anil Kumar is the petitioner in this petition. 2. The offences alleged are those punishable under sections 353, 332 and 427 read with 34 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argued inviting my attention to the allegations in the charge sheet that there is nothing against this petitioner, he is totally innocent and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner may be innocent or may be guilty, but these are purely questions of fact, which have to be decided on evidence and that exercise cannot be done by this court in this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner then pointed out that earlier a quash petition was filed and at that time there was stay of investigation granted by this court and despite the same police proceeded with the investigation and filed the charge sheet. He sought to question the charge sheet on that ground. It may however be noted that the petitioner moved Application No. 206 of 2011 in C.C. (SR) No.786 of 2011 for leave. The order passed by this court in that application is filed in the material papers and it is at page 20 thereof. A perusal of that order would show that this court refused to entertain the contempt case for the reasons stated therein and permitted the petitioner to file a quash petition against the charge sheet and therefore the petitioner filed this quash petition. It is true that pursuant to the above order of this court, the petitioner has filed this petition. But what should be noted is that there should be merit also in this petition. As already noted supra, specific allegations are made against this petitioner and therefore it is not possible to decide about the guilt or innocence of the petitioner, as that is admittedly a question of fact and this reason has already been mentioned supra. In the circumstances, there are no merits in this petition and it is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. 4. It shall however be open for the petitioner to make an application for discharge, if he is so advised before the trial court. _____________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J. June 8, 2011. *BVS