HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR Crl.P. No. 6623 of 2008 O R D E R: The petitioners, who are five in number, are A-1 to A5 in CC No.409 of 2006 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and they have filed this petition to quash the said case. 2. The offences alleged against them are punishable under sections 448, 427 and 323 IPC i.e., house trespass, mischief and causing simple hurt to the defacto complainant. It is seen that the defacto complainant has not been served, but this does not make any difference. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly raised three contentions in support of his plea for quashing the case against them. First is that the names of some of the accused, who were shown in the FIR were deleted from the case and some other persons have been included, whose names were not given in the FIR; second is that a civil suit i.e., OS No.2129 of 2006 was filed in respect of the property in question in the Prl. Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Ranga Reddy District and that the same has ended in an ex- parte decree and that the plaintiff in that suit is the mother of A-1 and the filing of the criminal case is a counter blast to the said suit; third is that some of the material witnesses were examined a day after the date of the incident and some other witnesses did not speak about the incident at all. Basing on the above three contentions and some other circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the case can be held to be a false one and is a fit case for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5. A perusal of the charge sheet and the allegations made in the FIR would disclose the offences which are mentioned in it. Hence, it cannot be said that this is a case where even if the allegations are believed, they do not constitute offences. This is the first minus point for prosecution. 6. It may then be noted that all the above three contentions raised by the petitioners’ counsel relate to the appreciation of the evidence and that has to be done only in the course of trial as they involve disputed questions of fact which cannot be decided in a quash petition. 7. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. The trial court shall dispose of the matter without being influenced in any manner by any of the observations made in the order. ___________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR, J Dt. 18.11.2011 Mjl/*