JUDGMENT : V.K. Bist, J. Present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :- “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to respondent no.1 and 2 and to arrest the stay of the petitioners in Case Crime No.289 of 2017 U/s 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 326 of I.P.C., P.S. Pathri, District Haridwar on 12.12.2017 against the petitioners.” 2. First information was registered by the complainant-respondent no.3 with the allegation that the petitioner no.1-Shaukeen and petitioner no.2-Khursheed used to park their tractor in the middle road and stop the way of the complainant. When complaint and his son objected, the petitioners had enmity with the complainant. On 04.12.2017 at about 06:00 p.m. petitioner no.1-Shaukeen parked his tractor near the door of the complainant. At this, the complainant objected; the petitioners abused and told him that they will kill him. After 5 minute of the incident petitioner no.1-Shaukeen armed with gandasi, Petitioner no.2-Khursheed armed with iron rod, petitioner no.3-Nafees, petitioner no.4-Sajid, petitioner no.5-Ayyub, armed with danda, petitioner no.6-Asif armed with iron rod, petitioner no.7-Jamshed armed with gandasi with common intention entered into the house of the complainant and Shaukeen and Jamshed attacked on the head of his sons with gandasi; in between complainant tried to save his sons but they also attacked on the complainant with lathis and iron rod. The complainant and his family members shouted; then the villagers came and the complainant and his family members could be saved. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are two cross F.I.R. one is lodged by the complainant against the petitioners and another is lodged by petitioner no.5 against the complainant and others. He submits that in the marpeet one Shakeela wife of Khursheed sustained injuries of hard and blunt object. He submits that petitioners’ side sustained much grave injuries and the injuries shown by the respondent’s side in their medical reports are artificial and simple in nature. He submits that the witnesses of the occurrence are the relatives of respondent no.3 and just to give colour to the story, they have been falsely mentioned as witnesses. He submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case due to aggression as the respondent no.3 have knowledge that petitioner no.1 lodged F.I.R. against him. 4. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal. Vs. He submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case due to aggression as the respondent no.3 have knowledge that petitioner no.1 lodged F.I.R. against him. 4. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal. Vs. Swapna Kumar, 1982 (1) SCC 561 , has held that if an offence is disclosed, Court will not normally interfere with the investigation into the case, and will permit investigation into the offence alleged to be completed. If the FIR, prima facie, discloses the commission of an offence, the Court does not normally stop the investigation, for, to do so would be to trench upon the lawful power of the police to investigate into cognizable offences. 5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the contents of the F.I.R. It cannot be said that from the reading of the FIR no offence is made out. Whether the facts mentioned in the F.I.R are correct or not, is a matter of investigation. In my opinion it is not a fit case where the Court should intervene. It is for the Investigating Officer either to file final report or charge sheet in the matter. 6. The writ petition is dismissed. So far petitioner nos.1 & 6 are concerned, if they are juvenile, they shall be dealt with in accordance with the provision of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. However, regarding other petitioners it is provided that if they surrender before the court concerned and seek bail application, their bail application shall be considered by the courts below expeditiously, preferably same day.