IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 908 of 2008 Israr Ahmad and others ……… Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ……… Respondents Mr. Modh. Safdar, Advocate vice Mr. Subhash Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the respondent no. 3. JUDGMENT Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Modh. Safdar, Advocate vice Mr. Subhash Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the respondent no. 3. 2. Learned Brief Holder for the State submits before this Court that it has been indicated in para 2 of the Counter Affidavit that the police has competed the investigation and after completion of investigation the police has found that there is a prima-facie case against the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 8 (Israr Ahmad, Smt. Dilshad, Km. Arashi Pravin, Masrur Ahmad, Mansur Ahmad, Vakkar Ahmad and Noshad Ahmad respectively). It has also been alleged in the counter affidavit that there is no prima-facie case against the petitioner no. 4 Osaf Ahmad. As such, the police has submitted the chargesheet or final repot, as the case may be, before the Circle Officer against the petitioners. It was further submitted that in view of above the writ petition filed by petitioners seeking quashing of the First Information Report and the case registered against them has, now, become infructuous. As such, the police is likely to submit the final report/chargsheet, as the case may be, before the competent court in the near future. 3. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. 4. However, interim order dated 18.11.2008 shall remain operative till the final report or chargsheet, as the case may be, is filed before the court concerned. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) Dated 23.12.2008 LSR