IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1310 of 2005 (M/B) 1. Smt. Sumitra Devi, W/o Late Daulat Singh, R/o Kathgharia, Tehsil Haldwani, District Nainital. 2. Km. Reeta D/o Late Daulat Singh, R/o Kathgharia, Tehsil Haldwani, District Nainital. …………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. S.H.O., Thana Haldwani, District Nainital. 3. Nain Singh @ Lal Singh, S/o Kishan Singh R/o Village Paniyali, Post Kathgharia, Thana & Tehsil Haldwani, District Nainital. ………. Respondents Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate for the petitionesr. Mr. H.C. Pande, Addl. Government Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, Advocate for respondent No.3. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. (Oral) Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.C. Pande, Addl. Government Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, Advocate for respondent No.3. 2. Mr. H.C. Pande, the leaned Addl. Government Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 & 2 submits that the writ petition filed by petitioners Smt. Sumitra Devi and Km. Reeta Seeking quashing of the First Information Report and the case registered against them, now, has become infructuous, as the Police, after the completion of the investigation, though did not find any case worth filing charge sheet against petitioner No.2 Km. Reeta, has filed charge sheet against petitioner No.1 Smt. Sumitra Devi before the concerning Court. 3. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. 4. With the above order, CLMA No. 11347 of 2005 also stands disposed of. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) (Rajeev Gupta, C.J.) 30.06.2006 30.06.2006 G