ORDER : 1. This petition has been filed by petitioner-accused No.2 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.966/2010 (Crime No.409/2009) in connection with S.C.No.319/2016, pending on the file of LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 302 r/w 34 of IPC. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1 State. IA No.1/2019 has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner for dispensation of notice to respondent No.2. The said application has been placed on record and notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 14.10.2009 at about 10.00 p.m. near veterinary hospital at Mysore road, when the deceased Ambi @ Raja Shekar and his friends CWs.1 to 3 were returning after having dinner at Select Hotel, accused Nos.1 to 5 wrongfully restrained the deceased and with a common intention accused Nos.4 and 5 caught hold of the deceased, accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted him with knife on his right thigh, accused No.3 assaulted him with razor on his left shoulders resulting in grievous bleeding injuries and death has been occurred. On the basis of the complaint, as case has been registered in Crime No.409/2009. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 that as against accused Nos.1, 3 to 5 trial has been held before the Fast Track Court-II, Bengaluru, in S.C.Nos.204/2010 and 697/2010. By judgment dated 21.9.2012, all the accused persons have been acquitted. It is his further submission that PWs.8 and 9 are the complainants and the eyewitness to the alleged incident and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile. Even PWs.2, 3, 6 who are the blood relatives of the deceased, they are not the eyewitnesses and they have also not spoken any incriminating evidence as against the petitioner-accused No.2. Even the trial Court while passing the order has clearly held that there is no evidence that accused Nos.1, 3 to 5 and absconding accused No.2 wrongfully restrained the deceased and accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted with knife. Taking into consideration the said evidence the accused have been acquitted. Even the trial Court while passing the order has clearly held that there is no evidence that accused Nos.1, 3 to 5 and absconding accused No.2 wrongfully restrained the deceased and accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted with knife. Taking into consideration the said evidence the accused have been acquitted. It is his further submission that even the recovery as held has also not been proved by the Sessions Judge and no recovery has been made at the instance of accused No.2. Looking from any angle holding of a trial is nothing but a futile exercise and no useful purpose is going to be served. On these ground he prayed to allow the petition and to quash the proceedings as against petitioner-accused No.2. 5. Percontra, the learned Additional SPP vehemently argued and submitted that PWs.8 and 9 are the eyewitnesses and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and they may come and speak as against accused No.2. It is his further submission that submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is a matter of evidence, at this pre-matured stage it cannot be held that there is no material as against the petitioner-accused and if the trial is held, truth will come up. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and perused the records. 7. Admittedly, the prosecution got examined 17 witnesses and out of that PWs.8 and 9 are the material witnesses. PW8 is the complainant and PW9 is the eyewitness and both have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile. Even nothing has been elicited so as to substantiate the case of the prosecution in crossexamination and the other witnesses i.e. PWs.2, 3, 6 and 7 are blood relatives and they have not speak anything as against the petitioner-accused and they were also not present at the place of alleged incident. 8. PW3 in her evidence has clearly stated that she does not know what galata has taken place between her brother and friends and only she speaks that her brother has been murdered. 9. Taking into consideration the above said facts and circumstances, except the official witnesses there is no material as against the petitioner-accused. 8. PW3 in her evidence has clearly stated that she does not know what galata has taken place between her brother and friends and only she speaks that her brother has been murdered. 9. Taking into consideration the above said facts and circumstances, except the official witnesses there is no material as against the petitioner-accused. Even the trial Court has made an observation that seizure of the knife as per Ex.P33 and the evidence at PW17 has not been proved and the prosecution has failed to prove the seizure pancha and failed to examine the panch witnesses. Under such circumstances, the trial held as against petitioner-accused No.2 appears to be nothing but a futile exercise and waste of judicial time. 10. Taking into consideration the above said facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings. 11. In that light, the petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.966/2010 (Crime No.409/2009) in connection with S.C.No.319/2016 pending on the file of LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 302 r/w 34 of IPC are hereby quashed.