Therefore, Annexure-2 judgment by itself cannot form the basis of a conclusion that the proceedings against the petitioner is to be quashed. However, the learned Public Prosecutor made available a copy of the signed statement of the defacto complainant wherein he has clearly conveyed that he does not want to pursue the matter further. According to him, the dispute which is the subject matter of the crime has been settled with the petitioner in the presence of mediators and he has no subsisting grievances. Therefore. I am of the view that further proceedings against the petitioner is unwarranted because, the chances of successful prosecution are bleak. This is particularly because, since the defacto complainant is not interested in pursuing the complaint, even if a trial is conducted against the petitioner, a different conclusion than arrived by the learned Magistrate in Annexure -2 judgment, cannot be expected. Moreover, the offences alleged against the petitioner are not very serious as well. Apart from the above, in the Annexure-A1 final report it can be seen that no specific overt act has been alleged against the petitioner. The allegations are general in nature and refer to all the accused persons in common. As per Annexure-A2 judgment, out of the four accused persons, three were already acquitted. Therefore taking into account all the above aspects, I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under Section
