ORDER : The accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 in C.C.No.26 of 2014 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurantakam, are the petitioners herein and they have filed this criminal original petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the charge sheet made against them in the above C.C.No.26 of 2014. 2. The case of the de facto complainant is that on 01.12.2012 at about 11 a.m., the petitioners and their men assembled near the land of the de facto complainant and trespassed into the same and also threatened him with dire consequences and hence, he has given a complaint to the first respondent police and on the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered in Crime No. 582 of 2012. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the complaint given by the de facto complaint is false and motivated one to wreak vengeance against the petitioners. It is further submitted that the de facto complainant did not lodge the complaint immediately after the alleged occurrence and he has belatedly sent the complaint to the first respondent police by post and upon receipt of the said complaint, the first respondent police entered it in C.S.R. Subsequently, the first respondent police has registered a case against the petitioners in Crime No. 582 of 2012 on 06.12.2012 for the commission of alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 427 and 506(i) IPC. Thereafter, the FIR was altered by the first respondent police vide alteration report dated 09.12.2012 altering Sections into Section 147 and 447 of IPC, stating that the Inspector of Police visited the place of occurrence only on 06.12.2012 and enquired the witnesses 2 to 5 and upon enquiry, it is found that the petitioners/accused went to the place of occurrence, but neither they assaulted the de facto complainant nor caused any damages to the groundnut crops as alleged in the complaint. In the said alteration report, it is further stated that upon enquiry, it is found that the complaint was made out due to previous enmity. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that all the witnesses, except the de facto complainant, have stated that only five persons came to the place of occurrence and none of them have stated that such an incident had been taken place as alleged in the complaint. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that all the witnesses, except the de facto complainant, have stated that only five persons came to the place of occurrence and none of them have stated that such an incident had been taken place as alleged in the complaint. Further, in all the statement of witnesses, it has not been stated that the accused have used any force or violence at the time of alleged occurrence. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that various grounds alleged by the petitioners herein are matter for trial and if the petitioners/accused relied upon the contradiction in the statements of L.W.1, L.W.2 and L.W.3, the same has to be canvassed only during trial before the Magistrate Court and they do not call for any adjudication under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the second respondent has also filed counter affidavit wherein it is stated that on 01.12.2012 at about 11 a.m. about 100 known persons of Thiruvathur Village Muslims Jamath came with Bull dozer No. D.S.1944699 and trespassed in his Patta Land (Survey No. 143/1 to 143/5) and ransacked the entire peanut crops, which were ripe for harvest and damaged the entire field, and the damage caused by them was worth Rs.50,000/-. Further, by using the Bull dozer, they formed 30 feet road in Survey Nos. 143/1 to 143/5 and 145 A, with the help of a politician and when the petitioners and their community people questioned the illegal action of the Muslim Jamatharas, they threatened the life of the petitioners and their people by dire consequences. It is further stated that in the land in Survey No. 131 the Muslim Jamaths used to bury the bodies without any permission from the Revenue Authorities. The Survey No. 132 is "Maikal Porombokku" land as per the revenue records and as per the report of the R.D.O., the said land is being used for burial illegally and the Government has not sanctioned the land to anybody else for using as burial ground. This being the situation, on 01.12.2012 the known person with the help of bull dozer trespassed into the patta land of the second respondent and laid a road measuring 38.2 meter length West to East. This being the situation, on 01.12.2012 the known person with the help of bull dozer trespassed into the patta land of the second respondent and laid a road measuring 38.2 meter length West to East. They have encroached about 13 1/2 cents from the second respondent's land to form the said road leading to the alleged burial ground. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the second respondent has filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 2106 of 2012 and as per the order of this Court dated 31.01.2012, the R.D.O. Maduranthagam made enquiry and gave his report on 20.02.2013. In the said report, he has categorically admitted that the Muslim Jamath people laid road without any sanction in the second respondent's patta land in Survey Nos. 143/1 to 143/5 to the extent of 13.5 cents encroachment. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the records. 7. On a perusal of records, it is seen that the case against these petitioners was originally registered in Crime No. 582 of 2012 based upon the complaint given by the informant alleging that the petitioners have made unlawful assembly and also threatened him with dire consequences and committed criminal trespass into the land of the informant and accordingly, an F.I.R. was initially registered for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 427 and 506(i) IPC and crime number was assigned as 582 of 2012 and after investigation, the first respondent police has altered the Sections vide alteration report dated 09.12.2012 altering into Sections 147, 447 of IPC. 8. Further, on a perusal of the statement of witnesses L.W.2-Modi Mastri and L.W.3-Kobiammal, it is seen that there is sufficient material available on record to proceed against the petitioners/accused for the alleged offences under Sections 147 and 447 of IPC as alleged in the final report and hence, this Court is of the considered view that any contradictions in the statement of L.W.1 with that of the private witnesses and the plea that there was previous enmity between the parties which has resulted in filing this complaint, is a question of fact which has to be decided only at the time of trial. Previous enmity as a motive is a double edged weapon and it has to be dealt with very carefully. 9. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that there are sufficient materials available on record for the alleged offences under Sections 147 and 447 of IPC to presume that these petitioners have committed the offence and they have to face the trial as the point raised by them can be decided only by the trial Court and not by this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this petition and this petition is liable to be dismissed. 10. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.