ORDER : The present petition is filed by accused No.3 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the entire proceedings pending in CC.No.2298/2018, on the file of the II Additional CMM Court, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.3 and the learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1State. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 3. The brief facts of the case are that aunt of the deceased Smt.Vijaya filed a complaint alleging that the marriage of the deceased was got performed with accused No.1 six months prior to the alleged incident. At the time of marriage, some gold articles and cash were given in the form of dowry. Accused persons used to ill-treat and harass the deceased. They used to assault and scold her in filthy language. They also used to pressurize her to bring additional dowry. Due to the said harassment by the accused, on 5.3.2007 at about 4.30 p.m., deceased committed suicide by strangulating herself. On the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed as against the accused. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.3 that accused No.1 is the main accused who is none other than the husband of the deceased. The case was tried before the Fast Track Court in SC.No.169/2009. By the order dated 8.9.2010, accused No.1 came to be acquitted. In the said case, prosecution got examined 10 witnesses and marked 10 documents. All the material witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile. Except the evidence of the official witnesses, there is no material as against the petitioner-accused No.3 and on the date of the alleged incident and prior to the said date, petitioner was also not residing along with the deceased and accused No.1. No overt acts are alleged as against the petitioner-accused No.3. When all the witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile, even if the trial is held as against the petitioner-accused No.3, no useful purpose would be served. No overt acts are alleged as against the petitioner-accused No.3. When all the witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile, even if the trial is held as against the petitioner-accused No.3, no useful purpose would be served. In order to meet the ends of justice, the power under Section 482 may be exercised by this Court and proceedings as against the petitioner may be quashed. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional SPP has vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner accused No.3 is absconding and NBW is issued as against him. He has not appeared before the Court. The said conduct of the petitioner appears to be abuse of process of law. On these grounds, he prayed that no good grounds are made out by the petitioner accused No.3 to quash the proceedings in question. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP and perused the papers including the certified copy of the judgment passed in SC.No.169/2009, dated 8.9.2010. On going through the said judgment, the prosecution got examined 10 witnesses. The complainant and other relatives of the deceased and the panch-witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile. The main accused is none other than the husband of the deceased who has already been acquitted by the Court below, by holding that there is no material as against accused No.1. I am conscious of the fact that while exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to look into the entire material on record. If the witnesses are examined subsequently and their evidence gives any incriminating material as against the accused, then under such circumstances the proceedings can be initiated against the coaccused. But, in the present case, the complainant has not deposed any thing as against accused No.1. who is the main accused. She has deposed before the Court that the accused have not demanded dowry and ornaments. She does not know as to why accused No.1 has ill-treated the deceased. She also does not know as to why the deceased committed suicide. who is the main accused. She has deposed before the Court that the accused have not demanded dowry and ornaments. She does not know as to why accused No.1 has ill-treated the deceased. She also does not know as to why the deceased committed suicide. When such an evidence is produced before the Court and if again the trial is held as against the petitioner-accused No.3, it is nothing but waste of judicial time and it is a futile exercise as against the petitioner. 7. When a trial is held as against the petitioner-accused, then there is no useful purpose in holding the retrial, the petitioner-accused No.3 cannot be asked to appear before the Court and to face the trial. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner-accused No.3 has made out a case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C by this Court. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in CC.No.2298/2018, pending on the file of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, stand quashed in so far as the petitioner-accused No.3 is concerned.