ORDER : MOHAMMAD NAWAZ, J. These three petitions arise out of the two FIRs., registered at Kadugondanhalli Police Station, Bangalore City, in Crime Nos.323/2025 and 324/2025. 2. Writ Petition No.28846/2025 is filed by the first informant in Crime No.323/2025. He is accused No.2 in Crime No.324/ 2025. The prayer in the petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT), headed by a Senior Officer under the supervision of this Court, to investigate FIR No.323/2025 and to conduct a time- bound and impartial investigation, also to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his family, pending investigation. 3. Criminal petition No.13885/2025 is filed by the petitioners challenging the FIR in Crime No.323/2025 of Kadugondanally Police Station, Bangalore City, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 190, 329(4), 324(4), 61, 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, wherein the first informant/Respondent No.2 is the petitioner in Writ Petition No.28846/2025. 4. Writ Petition No.33092/2025 is filed by the petitioners challenging the FIR lodged by one N.Saleem Ahmad, in Crime No.324/2025 of Kadugondanahalli Police Station, who is accused No.2 in Crime No.323/2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 329(4), 324 (4), 351(2), 352, 74 and 190 of the BNS, 2023. Criminal Petition No.13885/2025 5. The first informant/second respondent has set the law in motion in respect of an incident which took place on 12.09.2025 at about 14-15.30 hours at one Jamath-E-Lababeen Quwathul Islam Girls High School, Chuna Line, First Cross, K.G.Halli, Bangalore City, wherein he has alleged that the accused have committed criminal trespass, intimidation, contempt of court, criminal conspiracy and assault on him etc.,. The FIR is registered against three named and 65 others for the offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 190, 329(4), 324(4), 61, 351(2) of the BNS, 2023. Writ Petition No.33092/2025: 6. The petitioners have challenged the registration of the FIR in Crime No.324/2025 of Kadugondanahalli Police Station, wherein the first informant/second respondent has lodged a complaint alleging attempt to trespass, interfering in school activities by bribing school staff, abuse, sexual harassment, molestation and inappropriate behaviour towards a woman by the accused and their henchmen. 7. It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.33092/2025 that petitioner No.1 is the President of the Trust running the school vide Deed of Trust dated 03.02.2023 (Annexure-C). 7. It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.33092/2025 that petitioner No.1 is the President of the Trust running the school vide Deed of Trust dated 03.02.2023 (Annexure-C). By virtue of the said Deed of Trust, the petitioners' are in possession and when such is the case, the allegations of trespass is only misconceived and no criminal proceedings can be initiated. He further contended that the entire allegations of sexual harassment, molestation, etc. are vague and omnibus in nature. He contended that when there are civil suits pending, the police cannot adjudicate the right of the properties, right of the persons in the school activities and therefore, the entire proceedings are liable to be quashed. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Criminal No.13885/2025 has vehemently contended that even earlier there are complaints and FIRs. registered against the accused in Crime No.324/2025. The Trust Deed was cancelled on 26.03.2024, even otherwise the petitioners cannot be said to be running the school claiming to be the President and members. He has contended that the Registration of case against the petitioners is a counter blast to the earlier complaints just to knock off the petitioners from the property. 9. Learned counsel in Writ Petition No.33092/2025 has relied on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Naresh Aneja @ Naresh Kumar Aneja Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in 2025 Supreme(SC) 6, in support of his argument that, 'when bald assertions are made in the complaint, the ingredients of the offence cannot be said to have been made out'. Further relied on a decision of this Court in the case of Shivaswamy and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Another reported in 2022 (3) Crimes(HC) 102 , to contend that, when 'the possession itself is not with the complainant, there can be no offence of criminal trespass. 10. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and from the material on record, it can be seen that there is a dispute with regard to running of one Jamath-E-Lababeen Quwathul Islam Girls High School, where the incident is alleged to have taken place on 12.09.2025, in respect of which both the parties have filed complaints against each other, on the basis of which FIRs. are registered. 11. are registered. 11. To the contention raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Criminal Petition No.13885/2025 that the Trust Deed was cancelled subsequently, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.33092/2025 has contended that, the said cancellation has been revoked. 12. In both the complaints, allegations are made against each other with regard to trespass, assault etc. apart from other allegations with regard to outraging the modesty as it is made in Crime No.324/2025. Admittedly, suits filed by the parties with regard to the same property are pending before the Civil Courts. The disputed question regarding possession or the rights of the parties in the property cannot be adjudicated in these petitions and it cannot be held that there was no trespass or assault etc., as alleged in the complaint and counter complaints. Further, the allegations are not just that of trespass, but there are further allegations in both the complaints regarding assault, criminal intimidation etc.,. When such is the case, this Court cannot interfere with the investigation which is under progress in the case. 13. Learned HCGP has submitted that the investigation is at the fag end. The Hon'ble Apex Court has time and again reiterated that the statutory duty of the police to conduct investigation can be interfered with only in exceptional cases. When the investigation is said to be in progress, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings, as prima facie the allegations discloses cognizable offences. 14. Insofar as the relief sought in Writ Petition No.28846/2025, it is to be noted, after the incident in question, there was no untoward incident which has taken place. The jurisdictional police is conducting the investigation, which is at the fag end. It is not the case of the petitioner that impartial investigation is not being conducted by the police. There is no necessity to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) as prayed in the petition. The concerned police shall conduct a fair investigation and file appropriate report in both the cases. Accordingly, the following ORDER Writ Petition No.28846/2025 is disposed of. Criminal Petition No.13885/2025 and Writ Petition No.33092/2025 are dismissed. Pending IAs. are disposed of.