1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATIONS NO. 59,70, 80, 61, 79 OF 2008 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 59 OF 2008 Shri Hanmant R. Kulkarni .... Petitioner V/s The State (Through CBI, Panaji) .... Respondent Mr. S.G. Bhobe, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 70 OF 2008 Shri Anand B. Shirwaikar .... Petitioner V/s The State (Through CBI, Panaji) .... Respondent Mr. V.P. Thali, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 80 OF 2008 Shri Ramesh Mandrekar .... Petitioner V/s The State (Through CBI, Panaji) .... Respondent Mr. S. Samant, Advocate for the Petitioner – absent. Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 61 OF 2008 Shri Nilkanth N. Shrikhande .... Petitioner V/s The State (Through CBI, Panaji) .... Respondent Mr. S.G. Bhobe, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 79 OF 2008 Shri Rameshchandra R. Borkar .... Petitioner V/s The State (Through CBI, Panaji) .... Respondent Mr. S. Samant, Advocate for the Petitioner – absent. Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent. 2 CORAM : N.A. BRITTO, J. DATE : 29/10/2010 P.C.: Heard learned Counsel on behalf of the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. By consent, the impugned order dated 25/06/2008 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Special Judge (Sessions Judge, Panaji) to consider grounds nos.26,27 and 28 taken by the petitioners/accused by way of amendment in Criminal Revision Application No.70/2008 (i.e. objections to the framing of charge). 3. Counsel on behalf of the parties assure the Court that a copy of the said grounds/objections will be furnished to the learned Special Judge. The statement is accepted. In case any of the said grounds/objections are held against the petitioners/accused, it is made clear that the learned Special Judge will not be required to render de novo findings as far as the complicity of the petitioners/accused is concerned. However, the petitioners/accused are given liberty to challenge the said findings which are in the impugned order dated 25/06/2008 in case an adverse order against the petitioners/accused is made by the learned Special Judge in relation to the grounds now taken in the revision petition. 3 4. Parties to appear before the learned Special Judge on 19/11/2010 at 10.00 a.m., if not already exempted by the learned Special Judge. Learned Special Judge is directed to consider the said grounds as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of six months. N.A. BRITTO, J. NH/-