JUDGMENT 1. - By way of instant petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have challenged the order date? 4.10.1997 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbatsar taking cognizance against them for offence under sections 147 and 448 Indian Penal Code. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that in village Khokhar there is a Haweli wherein four brothers live. Three brothers namely Girdhari Singh, Mohan Singh and Dal Singh all sons of Vijay Singh are the accused-petitioners herein. Fourth son of Vijay Singh namely Gopal Singh is the complainant-respondent No. 2, herein. On 17.3.1994 second respondent-Gopal Singh lodged a written First Information Report at Police Station Parbatsar stating inter alia that Girdhari Singh S/o Vijay Singh, Ajit Singh S/o Girdhari Singh, Bhawani Singh S/o Mohan Singh, Ram Singh, Bheru Singh, Dal Singh, Mohan Singh, Pushpa Kanwar, Ichraj Kanwar and Rai Kanwar W/o Girdhari Singh entered in his room on first floor and placed some house-hold articles. Accused-Bhawani Singh asked his son Ranjeet Singh to execute a receipt of articles. His son under the pressure, executed the receipt indicating the presence of house-hold articles in the room. Accused persons entered in another room and threatened the female members of the family. It is further alleged that accused persons restrained him from entering in his house. On this information police registered a case under sections 147 and 448 Indian Penal Code and proceeded with investigation. After usual investigation, police forwarded the Final Report to the Court of concerned Magistrate. A protest petition was filed. Learned Magistrate after recording the statement of some of the witnesses under sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the impugned order has taken cognizance against the petitioners. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that instant petition deserves to be allowed. A perusal of the Final Report forwarded by the police, clearly shows that a trivial family dispute has been exaggerated and has been brought to the Court. The incident is of the year 1994. The cognizance has been taken after three years i.e. in the year 1997. There is no question of criminal trespass as the accused-petitioners and the respondent belongs to one family. The house belongs to the accused-petitioners and respondent. The incident is of the year 1994. The cognizance has been taken after three years i.e. in the year 1997. There is no question of criminal trespass as the accused-petitioners and the respondent belongs to one family. The house belongs to the accused-petitioners and respondent. Prima facie no case is made out against the accused-petitioners for offence under sections 147 and 448 Indian Penal Code. 4. Consequently, the misc. petition is allowed. The order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbatsar dated 4.10.1997 is quashed and set aside.Petition allowed. *******