1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.520 OF 2009 K. Jayprakash Shetty ...Applicant. v. The CBI & Anr. ...Respondents. Shri Unnikrishnan i/by Rajkumar Bhavsar, advs. for the applicant. Ms.Revati Mohite-Dere a/w Ms.Poornima H. Kantharia, advs. for the Respondent No.1/CBI. Shri Sanjeev Kanchan i/by M/s.Sanjeev Kanchan & Co., adv. for the respondent no.2. WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.521 OF 2009 Jitendra Y. Chajjed ..Applicant. v. CBI and Anr. ..Respondents. Mr. S.P.Kadam a/w Rajkumar Bhavsar, advs. For the Applicant. Mr.Mandar Goswami a/w S.R.SHinde, advs. For the Respondent No. 1/CBI. Shri Sanjeev Kanchan i/by M/s. Sanjeev Kanchan & Co., adv. for the Respondent no.2. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JULY 13, 2010 P.C. 1 Certain loans were advanced to four different companies by the respondent no.2/Vijaya Bank. As the amount was not received back, on a complaint by the bank, CBI investigated the case and filed CBI Special Case No.77/2000 which is pending before the Special Judge. 2 Accused Nos.1 and 3 had filed application for discharge which came to be rejected. Against that, they have filed these two revision applications. The learned counsel for the applicants informs that bank has received amount in full and final settlement under one time settlement scheme and the learned counsel for the respondent no.2/bank also concedes the same. However, payments made later on can not be taken into consideration for the purpose of considering the application for discharge. In view of this, the learned counsel for the applicants seek to withdraw the revision applications with liberty to file fresh writ petitions/applications to quash the proceeding in view of the subsequent developments. 2 Therefore, these revision applications stand disposed off as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)