Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040020942025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/317/2025 Ms Oyam Binggep Daughter of Shri Adoli Binggep, resident of Naharlagun, PO and PS Naharlagun. VERSUS The State of AP and 7 Ors represented by the Principal Secretary, Home, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, PO and PS Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The Commissioner of Law and Justices Home Age: 0 Occupation : Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3:The Principal Secretary cum LR and EX Officio Director (Prosecution) Age: 0 Occupation : Directorate of Prosecution Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Deputy Director Age: 0 Occupation : Directorate of Prosecution Page No.# 2/3 Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 5:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Papum Pare District Yupia Arunachal Pradesh. 6:H R Obing Age: 0 Occupation : Assistant Public Prosecutor CJM Papum Pare District. 7:Tana Tony Age: 0 Occupation : Assistant Public Prosecutor JMFC Papum Pare District. 8:Ms Techi Natu Age: 0 Occupation : Assistant Public Prosecutor JMFC Papum Pare District Advocate for the Petitioner : Taying Nega, Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 19-12-2025 Heard Mr. T. Nega, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms Page No.# 3/3 G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents No.1 to 5 as well as Mr. H. Lampu, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 and Mr. A. Arun, learned counsel for the respondents No.7 and 8. 2. The applicant along with others have filed writ petition being WP(C) No. 560 (AP)/2025 challenging the appointment of the private respondents No.6, 7 and 8 and the same is pending disposal. 3. By filing this interlocutory application, the applicant, who is the petitioner No.4 in the main writ petition has prayed that her name be struck off as she is no longer interested in pursuing the matter. 4. The prayer is not being objected to by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties/respondents. 5. In view of the above, this application to struck off the name of the petitioner No.4 as party petitioner in the connected writ petition being WP(C) No. 560(AP)/2025 is allowed. Accordingly, the name of the petitioner No.4 stands struck off. Registry shall do the needful. 6. Interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant