IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 867 of 2008 With Stay Vacation App. No. 8890/2008 Umesh @ Kattu & others. … Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others. … Respondents Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for respondent nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Ravendra Singh Bisht, Advocate for respondent no. 3. Hon’ble J.C.S, Rawat, J. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for respondent nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Ravendra Singh Bisht, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 2. Mr. B.S. Parihar,, the learned Brief Holder submits that the writ petition filed by the petitioners, has become infructuous as the police after completion of the investigation in the case have submitted the chargesheet against the petitioners before the Circle Officer concerned pn 01.12.2008 and the Circle Officer concerned is likely to submit the chargesheet before the Court concerned in the near future. 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. Stay vacation application stands disposed of accordingly. 4. Interim order dated 04.11.2008 shall remain operative till the submission of the chargesheet before the court concerned. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 29.12.2008 V.K