ORDER : The facts leading to this petition are that the Circle Inspector of Police, Chittapur Circle has filed a charge sheet against the accused persons including these petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(2)(n), 504, 506, 109 read with Section 149 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POSCO Act. On filing of the charge sheet, the case was committed to the Special Court. The charge was framed against accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376(2)(n), 504, 506, 109 read with Sections 149 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. Thereafter, full-fledged trial was held and on appreciating the oral and documentary evidence placed on record, accused No.1 was acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376(2)(n), 504, 506, 109 read with Sections 149 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act and he has set at liberty. The petitioners in this case are accused Nos. 2 to 5 and they have sought for quashing of the proceedings in Special Case (POCSO) No.53/2018, which is later numbered as Spl.C.C.No.1/2019. 2. The main grounds urged for quashing of the proceedings are that the victim girl has not supported the prosecution case. She has clearly stated in her evidence that neither accused No.1 nor accused Nos.2 to 6 have committed any offence. Further, she has clearly stated that accused have not kidnapped her and have not committed rape by threatening her. Even other direct witnesses have also not supported the case of the prosecution. Considering her evidence, accused No.1 has been acquitted. Under these circumstances, continuation of proceedings against the petitioners would be a futile exercise. Even if the evidence recorded in the earlier Special Case (POCSO) No.53/2018 is concerned, absolutely there is no case whatsoever against these petitioners and there is no possibility of conviction. Apart from this, the precious time of the Court would be wasted in this process. In this view of the matter, it is necessary to quash the proceeding initiated against these petitioners. 3. Apart from this, the precious time of the Court would be wasted in this process. In this view of the matter, it is necessary to quash the proceeding initiated against these petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contention relied on the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2005 (1) SCC 478 in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Akhilesh Singh wherein it is held as under: “A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – S.482 – Quashing of charges – Conspiracy to commit murder – Main accused, who was alleged to have hatched the conspiracy and who has motive to kill the deceased, already discharged and that matter attaining finality – Respondent implicated in the case on the basis of the alleged conspiracy entered into between him and the main accused – No other material placed before the Court to prove his complicity – No direct evidence that he supplied weapons and rendered assistance to assailants in carrying out the common object of killing the deceased – Held, High Court was fully justified in holding that no purpose would be served in further proceeding with the case against the respondent – Quashing of charges framed against him was therefore justified -Penal Code, 1860, S.120-B read with S.302 and S.109. B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – S.482 – Quashing of charges delay in filing of petition for – Condonation of – Propriety – Respondent approaching High Court after the order of discharge passed in favour of the main accused attained finality in 1994 as a result of dismissal of SLP by Supreme Court – In such circumstances, held, High Court rightly condoned the delay – No illegality or perversity in the exercise of power by High Court.” 4. In Special Case (POCSO) No.53/2018 PW.1 is the brother of the victim who is the complainant. According to PW.3 mother of the victim, CWs.1, 2 and 4 are the son and daughter of PW.3, CW.5 is the father of victim, CW.6 is her younger brother and CW.7 is her brother-in-law. PWs.1 to 5 are independent witnesses to the alleged incident of kidnap and rape and PW.11 is the younger sister of the victim. None of them have supported the case of the prosecution. Even PWs.6, 7 and 8 who are the mahazar witnesses have also not supported the case of the prosecution. PWs.1 to 5 are independent witnesses to the alleged incident of kidnap and rape and PW.11 is the younger sister of the victim. None of them have supported the case of the prosecution. Even PWs.6, 7 and 8 who are the mahazar witnesses have also not supported the case of the prosecution. The remaining witnesses are the Medical Officer and Police Officials. But, their evidence is not of much relevance in holding the petitioners guilty of the offences. When the complainant, victim, her relatives and the eyewitness have turned hostile and when the main accused has been acquitted of the offences and the matter has attained finality, no purpose would be served in further proceeding with the case against these petitioners. 5. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for quashing the proceedings. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.1/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(2)(n), 504, 506, 109 read with Section 149 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POSCO Act pending on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi is quashed. Consequently, I.A.1/2019 for stay stands disposed of.