ORDER : Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.25082/2007 on the file of the X ACMM, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru. 3. The FIR against the petitioners herein was registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 before respondent No.1 alleging that on 26/09/2006, the petitioners herein along with 40 to 50 others, came near the house of the complainant armed with clubs and sickles and assaulted them, causing injuries. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the above complaint is a counter blast to the complaint lodged by the petitioners herein against the complainant on 24/09/2006. The learned counsel submits that even though in the complaint it is alleged that the petitioners threatened to withdraw the criminal case filed against the complainant, C.C. No. 24096/2007 which was then pending has already ended in acquittal and therefore, there is absolutely no truth in the allegations made in the complaint. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that only the family members of the petitioners are roped in, even though it was alleged that there were 40 50 assailants, which is indicative of the fact that the entire complaint is the outcome of spite and malice and a counter blast to the complaint already lodged by the petitioners herein and therefore the present proceedings deserve to be quashed. Further, the learned counsel submits that the proceedings initiated against the very same petitioners at the instance of respondent No.2 are also quashed by this court in Criminal Petition No. 5356/2011. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and would submit that pursuant to the complaint lodged by respondent No.2, a detail investigation is undertaken and during the investigation, wound certificate relating to the injured witnesses have been secured and after laying the charge sheet, even the criminal court has taken cognizance of the alleged offences and trial has commenced, which itself indicates that the case registered against the petitioners is not false or baseless. Therefore, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. 6. Therefore, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and on going through the materials, what is required to be seen is, whether the allegations made against the petitioners in the complaint and the consequent charge sheet are false and baseless and do not make out the offences alleged against them. The very fact that the investigation has been conducted and charge sheet has been laid, itself presupposes that there is sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners. That apart, the Criminal Court has also taken cognizance of the matter and after hearing the petitioners, has framed charges and the petitioners are already facing trial before the XI ACMM, Mayohall Unit, Bengaluru. It is also submitted that a counter case filed by the petitioners herein is also pending before the same Court and 313 statement has already been recorded. It is not in dispute that both the cases are arising out of the incident which is alleged to have taken place on 26/9/2006. Therefore it is necessary that both these cases have to be heard and disposed of together. Even otherwise, there being sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners, it cannot be said that the material collected by the Investigating Agency does not make out any offences alleged against the petitioners. I do not find any justifiable reason to exercise the discretion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings. Hence, the petition is dismissed. The Trial Court shall dispose of the proceedings pending before it, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.