HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Crl.P. No. 2253 of 2009 DATED: 14.12.2011 Between: G. Annaiah and four others .. Petitioners And 1. The State of A.P. .. Respondents 2. P. Anjaneyulu O R D E R:- 1. Heard Sri D. Kodanda Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioners are A1 to A5 in P.R.C. No. 34 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vayalpad, Chittoor District. They filed this petition for quashing the aforesaid Preliminary Registered Case. 3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are those punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 302 read with Section 109 and 149 IPC. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 17.02.2006 in the night at about 10.30 P.M. when the complainant was returning from agricultural bore well in the village. It must be mentioned here that another incident is said to have taken place on 17.02.2006 in which one girl by name Pothi Bujatha is said to have been abused in filthy language by the 1st petitioner – Ganimaneni Annaiah. That was registered as Crime No. 10 of 2006 of Kolakada Police Station and it ultimately culminated in C.C. No. 95 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vayalpad, Chittoor District. That case is said to have ended in acquittal and this is confirmed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since C.C. No. 95 of 2006 ended in acquittal, the present P.R.C. must also be treated as baseless one. It is difficult to accept this contention in this proceeding. Several contentions raised by the petitioners’ counsel based upon the acquittal in C.C. No. 95 of 2006 and certain other aspects would also show that they pertain to disputed questions of fact which cannot be decided in this petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. 5. At the end, the learned counsel for the petitioners requested that the presence of the petitioners before the Committal Court for every date of hearing be dispensed with. I am of the opinion that the petitioners can make request for this relief before the Committal Court. Accordingly, that relief is also rejected here. __________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J 14.12.2011 bcj