IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2628 of 2019 Decided on: 30th July, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jai Pal and another …..Petitioners Versus Reserve Bank of India and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Kumar Tomar, Advocate. For the Respondents: None for respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioners allege that even though office records of respondents No.2 and 3-Bank reflect having advanced loan to the petitioners, however, they have never received any loan amount. Several other allegations on facts have been raised in the writ petition. Adjudication of this writ petition would necessarily involve questions of facts, which are disputed by learned counsel for the respondents. 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy in law for the redressal of their grievances. Granting such permission, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 30, 2026 Judge Mukesh