IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 955 of 2008 Amit Bansal. …… Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ….Respondents. Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A for respondent nos. 1 to 3. None for respondent no. 4. Hon’ble J.C. S. Rawat, J. Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for respondent nos. 1 to 3. None for respondent no. 4. 2. Mr. Nandan Arya, the learned A.G.A. submits that the writ petition filed by the petitioner, has become infructuous as the police after completion of the investigation in the case have submitted the chargsheet against the petitioner before the court concerned on 14.01.2009. This fact has been indicated in Para 2 of the counter affidavit filed by the State. 3. In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. 4. Consequently, the Interim order dated 02.12.2008 stands vacated automatically. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 19.2.2009 V.K.