THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH CRL.P.NO.1274 OF 2009 OR D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the FIR No.105/2008 dated 1.10.2008 on the file of the Police Station Moghalpura, Hyderabad. 3. From the material on record, it could be seen that the 3rd respondent, is claiming that he is the legal heir of deceased Syed Hameeduddin and accordingly claiming his movable and immovable, including his house property bearing no.23-2-549/1, consisting of ground and first floor with RCC building situate at Moghalpura, Hari Bowli, Hyderabad, admeasuring 126 sq. yards. His case is that the accused/petitioner is the tenant of a part of the said house for a monthly rent of Rs.5,000/-. The allegation of the 3rd respondent/complainant is that when their family members called for a meeting, to resolve the dispute about legacy of deceased Syed Hameeduddin and distribution of movable and immovable properties and that when they reached the above said house property, they noticed that some of the movable furniture, metal items and costly copper utensils have been sold by the accused/petitioner and that he also broke the almirah of deceased Syed Hameeduddin, in which personal belongings of him, such as diary, property documents, unused cheque books, two passports of Syed Hameeduddin and his wife Smt. Anwarnussisa Begum, four bank pass book, ration card, identity cards etc., and costly cloths and these items have been found stolen. With these averments, inter alia, the complaint was filed under Sections 404, 420, 424, 468 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The claim of the accused/complainant is that he is none other than the son of late Syed Hameeduddin and that he is not the tenant and, there was no necessity for him to commit the offence alleged and that he has also not committed. Therefore, his case is that the allegations in the complaint do not prima facie make out any offences alleged by the complainant and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. The 3rd respondent filed counter affidavit and reiterated the averments made in the complaint. 5. The 3rd respondent – complainant filed complaint with the above allegations and the claim of the petitioner whether he is the son of the deceased Syed Hameeduddin, cannot be gone into by this court and, therefore, having regard to the nature of allegations, this court is not inclined to exercise the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the FIR. Hence, the criminal petition is dismissed. No costs. AVS ------------------------------ 12—10—2011