JUDGMENT B.B. Mangalmurti, J. - I.A. No. 1246 of 2019 AND I.A. No. 1247 of 2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the C.B.I. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that order dated 28th September, 2018 passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi is under challenge by which Court below has dismissed petition for discharge. He further submitted that now the charge upon accused persons including both petitioners have been framed on 28th November, 2018 and for bringing this subsequent development, he has filed instant applications. 3. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submitted that now the case is fixed for prosecution witnesses. 4. In view of above submission of the parties as well as subsequent development made in the case, I.A. No. 1246 of 2019 and I.A. No. 1247 of 2019 stand allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary correction/amendment in the main application in paragraph1 as well as in the prayer portion. Cr. M.P. No. 3939 of 2018 AND Cr. M.P. No. 3941 of 2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the C.B.I. 6. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that initially order dated 28th September, 2018, passed by Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi by which the application for discharge was dismissed. He further submitted that later on Court below framed charge upon accused persons including both the petitioners by terms of order dated 28th September, 2018. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the petitioners were guaranters and in no way were not involved in cheating the bank. The loan amount was sanctioned and disbursed by the bank after proper verification and during that process these guaranters were not informed about any irregularities committed by the persons in whose favour loan amount was sanctioned and disbursed. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that bank also approached Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi, who passed judgment on 18th February, 2016 where the defendants were directed to pay amount within one month from the date of judgment. Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi also directed that entire property be put on public auction as per procedure established by the law and distribute the sale proceeds ratably to the banks while distributing the sale proceeds claims of Canara Bank shall be satisfied first. 9. Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi also directed that entire property be put on public auction as per procedure established by the law and distribute the sale proceeds ratably to the banks while distributing the sale proceeds claims of Canara Bank shall be satisfied first. 9. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submitted that both the petitioners were guaranters and borrowers but failed to return the loan amount against whom bank approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi and judgment was passed in favour of the bank. During the investigation involvement of both the petitioners were found and charge sheet were submitted. Presently the Court below has also framed charge upon the accused persons including both the petitioners and the case is now fixed for prosecution evidence. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the papers attached with this application, it appears that the Court below has passed reasoned order and found prima facie case against these petitioners thereby rejected the discharge application filed on behalf of these petitioners. The subsequent development is that charge has already been framed upon the accused persons including these petitioners. Therefore, finding no occasion to interfere in the impugned order hence, instant writ petition is dismissed. 11. Let copy of this order be transmitted by FAX to the Court concerned at the cost deposited by the petitioner.