THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3400 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the petitioners’ counsel. Petitioners are A1 to A3 in C.C.No.62 of 2011 on the file of the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. They filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) for quashing the said criminal case. 2. The offences alleged are those punishable under Sections 353, 504 and 506 IPC. The version of the prosecution is that there was a complaint from a person to repair the pipeline as there was a supply of contaminated water and when the officials of the water works department went to repair that pipeline the accused prevented them from discharging their duties, assaulted them and intimidated them. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners says that a suit was filed by the accused party against the Municipal Corporation for damages and consequently in a haste the police have filed this case against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision of our Supreme Court in STATE OF HARYANA vs. BHAJAN LAL[1] in support of his contention that the criminal case should be quashed. He specifically relied upon the seventh situation mentioned in the said judgment wherein an FIR can be quashed. That situation or criteria reads that an FIR or a criminal case can be quashed where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. The learned counsel for the petitioners says that since the petitioners and their party filed a suit against the Municipal Corporation for damages this case which has been filed against them at the instance of the Municipal Corporation should be quashed. There is no force in the said contention. 4. It may be noted that the prosecution version is that the officials of the water works department/ Municipal Corporation have been assaulted and they are public servants. It is not stated what mala fides they can have against these petitioners. The allegations in the FIR do disclose offences against these petitioners. Whether the petitioners are innocent or guilty of the said offences has to be decided upon evidence and that question cannot be adjudicated in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5. All the contentions raised by the petitioners are in the form of their defence to the charges brought against them and they can effectively plead the same before the Court in which the case is pending. 6. Accordingly this Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR, J. 18th April 2011 CVRK [1] 1992 SCC Supp (1) 335