IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (SUO MOTU) NO. 1 OF 2008 . ... Appellant Versus THE STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kamat, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the respondents. Coram:- B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & U. D. SALVI, JJ. Date:- 8th April, 2009 PC : This PIL is instituted on a paper report. 2. Now It is pointed out by learned Advocate General that charge sheet is filed before the Children Court and said Court has thereafter given regular bail after perusal of the papers produced. 3. Learned Advocate General therefore states that the monitoring by this Court under such circumstances is not possible. 4. It is further stated that though this Court has recorded that earlier the accused was absconding, an affidavit is filed by State pointing out that the accused was all the while available and was not taken in custody because the Investigating Agency at that time did not need it. 5. We find that after filing the charge sheet monitoring by us of further trial in the matter may not be possible and proper. We therefore accept the request made by learned Advocate General to drop the proceedings. 6. We accordingly disposed of the PIL as infructuous. B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. U. D. SALVI, J. at*