Judgment :- Petitioners herein are practising Women Lawyers at Kancheepuram and both of them are in the panel of Taluk Legal Services Committee, Kancheepuram. Misconstruing their visit to the sub-jail on 1.2.2005 and 9.2.2005 as though they had attempted to induce one Ravisubramaniam, an accused in the sensitive criminal case, namely, Sankararaman murder case, in crime No.914 of 2004 on the file of Vishnu Kanchi Police Station and now pending as S.C.No.197 of 2005 on the file of District and Sessions Court, Chingleput, to resile from his earlier statement made against the co-accused in the said case, a case was registered against both the petitioners in crime No.127 of 2005 for the offences punishable under Sections 201 read with 109, 213, 450 and 506(2) IPC, in which final report had already been filed and was taken on file as PRC No.3 of 2005 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram. 2. According to Mr.K.Chandru, learned Senior Counsel appearing for both the petitioners, the petitioners have no involvement whatsoever in the above crime and they are in no way connected with the offences registered against them. It is further contended that the respondents Police are harassing the petitioners under the guise of investigation and further action in the matter, without any basis. Hence the petitioners seek for a writ of mandamus directing transfer of the investigation of the case in crime No.127 of 2005 from the third and fourth respondents to the fifth respondent, the Central Bureau of Investigation. 3. Mr.K.Doraisamy, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents brought to my notice that the investigation is already over and the final report has also been filed and taken as PRC No.3 of 2005 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram. Hence it is argued that there is no requirement to transfer the case as prayed for at this stage. 4. My attention was also invited to the orders of this Court dated 15.3.2005 in W.P.No.6407 of 2005 filed by one A.Shanmugham, a practising advocate in Kancheepuram, to whose office the petitioners are attached to. In the said order, the statement of the learned Public Prosecutor that no proceedings are contemplated against the writ petitioner A.Shanmugham was recorded. 4. My attention was also invited to the orders of this Court dated 15.3.2005 in W.P.No.6407 of 2005 filed by one A.Shanmugham, a practising advocate in Kancheepuram, to whose office the petitioners are attached to. In the said order, the statement of the learned Public Prosecutor that no proceedings are contemplated against the writ petitioner A.Shanmugham was recorded. Therefore, this Court required the learned Public Prosecutor to get instructions of the Government in the case of petitioners herein, who are also similarly placed to that of A.Shanmugham and offer his opinion in the matter as contemplated under Section 321 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. Today Mr.K.Doraisami, learned Public Prosecutor after getting necessary instructions from the Government, perusing the relevant records, applying his mind on the issue and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submits that necessary steps will be taken to withdraw the case against the petitioners in accordance with law or alternatively the petitioners may be permitted to take appropriate steps in PRC 3 of 2005 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram, to discharge themselves, to which learned Public Prosecutor will not have any objection. Of course, the learned Public Prosecutor also expects the petitioners that they will not give any room for such allegations in future. 6. Both the petitioners present before the Court today stated that they did not involve in any such act as complained and charged, nor they will involve in such act in future. The above statement of the petitioners is put on record. 7. In view of the fair stand of Mr.K.Doraisamy, learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the considered opinion that nothing survives in the above writ petitions and therefore no further orders are required in the matter, except to permit the learned Public Prosecutor to take steps for withdrawal of the case against the petitioner as contemplated under Section 321 Crl.P.C., or alternatively, to permit the petitioners to get themselves discharged from PRC No.3 of 2005 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram, in accordance with law, in appropriate proceedings. 8. The Registry is directed to post the matter after two weeks for reporting the steps taken as indicated above.