Prosecution as against an absconding accused is sought to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It appears that the case against the other accused stands withdrawn by the Government. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is brought by the defacto complainant and other material witnesses in the case. When asked what their locus standi is to have the prosecution as against the accused quashed, the learned counsel submitted that continuance of prosecution will affect the sureties, who will find it difficult to produce the accused, who has absconded. If that is the grievance, and if the court proceeds against the sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C., the sureties will have to show cause against forfeiture of bond, and in case penalty from out of bond amount is imposed they will have to pursue to the normal or legal remedies by way of criminal appeal or revision, as the case may be. Pendency of prosecution is always the concern of the accused, and not the concern of the witnesses. Witnesses cannot bring application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to have prosecution against the accused quashed. If proceedings come against sureties in due course, they will have to face it and pursue proper remedies, as observed above. To save the sureties, this application brought by the witnesses cannot be entertained by this Court. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he would like to withdraw the Crl.M.C., without prejudice to the right of the parties to pursue proper remedies. This submission is recorded, and the Crl.M.C. is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE sd // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE