IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Transfer Application No. 12 of 2009 Jai Prakash Mishra and others .……… Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand .……… Respondent Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. G.A. for the State/respondent. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. G.A. for the State/respondent. Learned Addl. G.A. pointed out that the main grievance alleged by the petitioners in the transfer petition is that immediately after joining in District Pauri as Assistant Teachers, there was a great resentment shown by the local leaders of the Pauri who had launched agitation against their appointments. All sorts of baseless allegations were made against them. Thereafter, they have been transferred from District Pauri. Thereafter, several petitions were filed by the petitioners to transfer the case from Pauri to other districts but all the times the proceedings remained stayed and the transfer applications which they have filed was disposed of by this Court. Later on, it is transpired from the record that the case has been transferred to J.M., Champawat from where non-bailable warrants have been issued and the petitioners have never appeared before the Court. There is no allegations against the residents of Champawat and Champawat is far off district from Pauri. Learned Addl. G.A. further pointed out that the petitioners are avoiding to come to the Court even after the transfer of the case; either they have sought the bail at Gorakhpur, thereafter they filed transfer application; the transfer application was dismissed as infructuous as alleged by the petitioners; inspite of that the petitioners did not appear before the Court; it is also concealed as to how the case has been transferred from Pauri to Champawat; and in these facts and circumstances, it is revealed that the petitioners are avoiding there presence before the Court. 2 After raising the said objection by the learned Addl. G.A., the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition. Permission granted. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial within a period of four months from the date of the receipt of this order. It is also directed that the petitioners shall appear before the trial court on 20th July, 2009 positively. If the petitioners did not appear before the trial court, the trial court will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with the law. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 02.07.2009 Shiv