HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.NO.371 of 2002 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 31.12.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi, in an unnumbered Crl.M.P. of 2001 in Crime No.71 of 1998 in C.C.No.412 of 2001. On the basis of a report given by the Head Constable No.995, Dharmajigudem Police Station, the Sub Inspector of police, Dharmajigudem registered a case against the respondents 2 to 74-accused in Crime No.71 of 1998 under Sections 147, 148, 447, 448, 332, 352, 384, 385, 427, 506 (2) read with Section 109 and 149 of I.P.C. and also Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984. After completion of investigation, the Inspector of Police, Chintalapudi filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences and the same was taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi as C.C.No.412 of 2001. During the pendency of the said case, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Rt.No.799, Home (Police-F) Department, dated 22.05.2001, wherein the Government has decided to withdraw the prosecution launched against the accused and others. In the light of the said Government Order, the Assistant Public Prosecutor, Chintalapudi, filed a petition under Section 321 of Cr.P.C. seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the prosecution launched against the respondents 2 to 74/accused herein. The Court below, by a docket order dated 31.12.2001, allowed the said petition withdrawing the case against the accused. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner field the present revision. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court below ought not to have accepted the petition filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor and withdrew the case against the respondents 2 to 74/accused herein without following the mandatory requirement of law. He further submits that the Court below had not adverted to all the relevant facts and material to hold that the application filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor was in good faith and in public interest. Heard both sides and perused the impugned order. From a perusal of the material available on record, this Court is thoroughly satisfied that it is not on mere presentation of the application by the Assistant Public Prosecutor, the Court below accorded permission to withdraw the case against the accused. The Court below having considered the submissions made by the Assistant Public Prosecutor came to the conclusion that the prosecution launched against the accused need not be continued since the petition filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor is in good faith and in public interest. Therefore, the order passed by the Court below is justified and I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. I find no merit in this revision. The Criminal Revision Case is accordingly dismissed. ___________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 26-08-2010 Gsn.