IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6695 OF 2009 Between: J. Janamma @ Janaki. ..... PETITIONER. AND The State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, and another. ..... RESPONDENTS. Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.263 of 2008 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. N. RAMACHANADER RAO, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the first Respondent, the Court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6695 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri K. S. Suneel Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public prosecutor for the first respondent. No notice is being ordered to the second respondent as the petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. The petitioner is prosecuted as the second accused in C.C. No.263 of 2008 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, for an offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, she is alleged to be the first wife of the first accused and to have beaten Smt. P. Lakshmi Devi, second wife of the first accused with hands on 02-07-2007 night. While the other allegations leading to the consumption of baygon spray and hospitalization of Smt. P. Lakshmi Devi are concerned, the petitioner is not attributed any responsibility. The charge sheet cites two eye witnesses and one circumstantial witness to prove the allegations against both the accused and the investigation was stated to have revealed the truth of the allegation about the petitioner beating Smt. P. Lakshmi Devi. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the statement of Smt. P. Lakshmi Devi, that led to the registration of the Crime also make a similar allegation and what the petitioner claims herein is that, she is innocent of the alleged offences and that the defacto complainant made a false statement and that there was no specific allegation against her. These issues of fact raised by the petitioner are disputed questions of fact and the allegations against the petitioner and the denials by her are matters to be gone into and determined on merits by the trial Court on examination of the oral and documentary evidence to be placed before it during trial but, not for this Court to make them subject of a deep fact finding enquiry in these summary proceedings. This Court cannot go into the reliability, acceptability and genuineness of the allegations of the prosecution in a proceeding under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, which questions have to be left to the trial Court to decide on merits. Hence, the Criminal petition is not sustainable and it is accordingly dismissed. ____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 26-08-2009. Dsh.