1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.358 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1562 OF 2009 Suresh Jagannath Lokhande & Anr. .. Applicants. V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.S.G.Deshmukh for the Applicants. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP for the State. . CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 18TH JANUARY, 2010 P.C. : 1. On 8th September, 2009 the Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order in the Criminal Writ Petition No.1562 of 2009:- This petition has been filed with a prayer for transfer of “ investigation of the case to any appropriate and efficient agency, like C.I.D., or CB.I. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, that the investigation is complete and the chargesheet has been filed on 12.1.2006. In view of this statement, no further orders are necessary. Writ Petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner has any grievance against filing of the chargesheet, he is at liberty to take appropriate remedy available in law.” 2. Now this application is filed for recalling of the said order dated 8th September, 2009. So far as the order dated 8th September, 2009 passed in the petition is concerned, the said order is passed on merits of the petition. The order even does not say that the Advocate for the petitioners was not present. There is no question of recalling the said 2 order, and even the review of the said order is not permissible. If the petitioners have any grievance against the said order, the appropriate remedy for them is to approach the Supreme Court against the said order. This Court cannot recall the order passed by the earlier Bench, which was passed on merits of the petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the earlier Bench has given liberty to the petitioners to take appropriate remedy available in law in case they have any grievance against filing of the chargesheet. We make it clear that the observations made by earlier Division Bench would remain, and it would be for the petitioners to take appropriate steps for availing of appropriate remedy available in law. Subject to the same, this application is rejected. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)