JUDGMENT : Through this writ application, entire criminal proceeding of Koderma (T) P.S case no.195 of 2004 including the order dated 19.5.2009 under which cognizance of the offences taken against the petitioner under Sections 365 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code has been sought to be quashed. The facts giving rise this application are that one Tej Narayan Singh, the informant submitted a written report before the Officer-in-Charge, Telaiya Police Station stating therein that his daughter Anamika has been missing since early morning of 15.5.2004. In course of search, he came to know that she was lastly seen in the company of this petitioner, who was her tutor and as such, there was every reason to believe that the petitioner enticed away his daughter. On the said information, Koderma (T) P.S case no.195 of 2004 was instituted under Sections 365 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. When the girl was recovered, she made statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that she had never been enticed away by the petitioner, rather she herself with her own accord had gone with him and married him and presently she is having a female child out of the said wedlock. Thereupon, an application was filed by the information, father of the girl before the Investigating Officer to the effect that the petitioner had never committed offence as has been alleged, rather her daughter had married him with her own accord and presently she is living a peaceful married life with the petitioner. The informant also filed an application that since the matter has been compromised between the parties, he does not want to proceed with the case but in spite of all these facts, charge sheet was submitted, upon which cognizance of the offences was taken against the petitioner under Sections 365 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide its order dated 19.5.2009 which has been sought to be quashed. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the informant in his written report had alleged that his daughter aged about 16 years has been enticed away by the petitioner but subsequently, when he came to know from his daughter that she herself had went along with the petitioner and married him willingly and is having a female child with their wedlock, an information to that effect was given to the Investigating Officer stating therein that date of birth of his daughter as 23.6.1986 which gets confirmed from the discharge slip issued by Kurji Holly Family Hospital, Patna but in spite of that, charge sheet was submitted, though the informant had intimated to the Investigating Officer in writing that he does not want to proceed with the case as the matter has been compromised in between the parties as the petitioner and his daughter are living peaceful married life. Thus, it was submitted that under the aforesaid situations no useful purpose would be served to allow the proceeding to be continued with as virtually there would be absolutely no chances of petitioner being convicted and as such, any continuation of the proceeding would be a futile exercise. The informant, respondent no.3 by putting his appearance in this case has filed counter affidavit wherein all the facts, as has been stated, has been admitted. The informant, respondent no.3 by putting his appearance in this case has filed counter affidavit wherein all the facts, as has been stated, has been admitted. No doubt it is true that the informant lodged a case suspecting the petitioner to have kidnapped or enticed away his daughter but subsequently, after the statement was given by his daughter under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that she had never been enticed away, rather she had gone with her own accord with the petitioner and married him and is having a female child with their wedlock, an information was given by the informant to the Investigating Officer about all these facts and also intimated him that he, in the aforesaid circumstances, does not want to proceed but in spite of this background, charge sheet was submitted, upon which cognizance was taken under Sections 365 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code which speaks about kidnapping or abducting for wrongful confinement and enticing away minor girl but there appears to be absolutely no material of constituting any offence either under Section 365 or under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code as the daughter of the informant has herself made statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that she had gone with the petitioner with her own accord and had married him which statement itself indicates that neither there has been any element of kidnapping nor there has been any fact to show even, prima facie, that the petitioner had induced the daughter of the informant to go with him and as such, no offence is made out either under Section 365 or under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Moreover, when the petitioner and the daughter of the informant have been living peaceful married life with the female child born with their wedlock and that the informant has already disclosed that he is not at all interested in prosecuting the case, there would be no useful purpose to allow the prosecution to proceed with the case, as virtually there would be no reasonable likelihood of accused being convicted for the offence alleged and as such, any continuation of the proceeding would be a futile exercise. Thus, for the reasons discussed above, entire proceeding Koderma (T) P.S. case no.195 of 2004 including the order dated 19.5.2009 under which cognizance of the offence was taken is hereby quashed. In the result, this application is allowed.