( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1546 OF 2010 Abdul Mulhim Abdul Mustakim & 17 others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.J. Salunke, advocate for the applicant. Mr. N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent/State. Smt. S.S. Jadhav, advocate for the respondent No. 2. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 18th October, 2010] PER COURT : 1. The application is filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. The applicants allege that they were not present at the time of the alleged incident which is said to have occurred on 2nd January, 2010. They alleged further that the FIR lodged by the respondent No. 2 Abdul Karim is outcome of the previous enmity and dispute. They alleged that there is civil dispute regarding calculation of land Gut No. 21, situated at village Mogra. It is contended that due to ( 2 ) property dispute, false report is lodged by the respondent No. 2. 3. Having heard learned advocate and learned A.P.P., it appears prima facie that the application is founded on the future plea of alibi which would be available probable during course of the trial. The FIR cannot be quashed on the basis of defence which the applicants may be able to raise during the course of trial. So far as enmity between the applicants and the respondent No. 2 is concerned, it may be stated that the enmity is double-edged weapon. It may be the reason for filing of false complaint or it may be a reason for causing assault by the applicants on the complainant. At the premature stage, the FIR cannot be branded as totally false and abuse of the process of law only because the applicants and the respondent No. 2 are on inimical terms and the property disputes are going on between them. The recitals of the FIR prima facie show that the informant i.e. the respondent No. 2 and his brother were assaulted after their hands and legs were tied by means of rope and thereafter, cash amount and a mobile phone, etc. were taken away from their possession. It is alleged that the respondent No. 2 and his brother thereafter went to the Police Station and lodged the ( 3 ) FIR. They were referred to the Rural Hospital at Majalgaon. Learned APP points out that the medico-legal certificates corroborate the fact that the respondent No. 2 and his brother had received injuries. Thus, it cannot be said that the FIR is totally baseless nor the plea of alibi raised by the applicants can be taken into account as sufficient ground to quash the FIR. Hence, the application is without substance and the extraordinary relief under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is unavailable to the applicants. The application is accordingly dismissed. The ad-interim relief, if any stands vacated. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln1546-10