Proceedings quashed where continuing them would constitute an abuse of process, following an acquittal of a co-accused for lack of evidence.

O R D E R

(Dated this the 25th day of February, 2026)

The 2^nd accused in SC No. 995 of 2018 on the the Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Pathanamthitta arising out of Crime No. 1973 of 2016 of Ranni Police Station filed this petition under Section 528 BNSS praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the co-accused are under Section 304, 324 r/w 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 29.10.2016 at about 10.30 am, the accused persons who are the husband and son in law of one Nazeema, aged 39 took her in a jeep from Vijayawada, Andra Pradesh and abandoned her in front of the Taluk hospital, Ranni and thereby they are alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, as per Annexure A3 judgment, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the 1^st accused for want of evidence. Therefore according to the learned Counsel, there is no meaning in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner. Therefore, she prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The petition was strongly opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. On a perusal of Annexure A3 judgment of the learned Sessions Judge it is revealed that after a full fledged trial the sessions judge acquitted the 1^st accused as the prosecution failed to prove the charge against him. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the crucial witness CW11 could not be examined and that is why the learned Special Judge acquitted the 1^st accused.

6. It is true that in spite of coercive steps, the prosecution failed to procure the attendance of CW11. At the same time, the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 8 and marked Exts.P1 to P10. After evaluating the evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge found that the prosecution failed to prove the offences under Section 304, 324 r/w 34 IPC and it was in the above context, the 1^st accused was acquitted as per Annexure A3 judgment.

In the above circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner as the same will only be an abuse of the process of court. Therefore, this Crl.MC is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in SC No. 995 of 2018 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Pathanamthitta is quashed.

Sd/-