901-REVN.292.2018.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.292 OF 2018 Anmol Govindram Sekhri ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra through the Central Bureau of Investigation ...Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr. Tanveer Khan, A.P.P for the Respondent–State. Mr. Digvijay S. Kachare with Mr. Kuldeep Patil for the Respondent- Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). CORAM: ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 17th SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Mr. Kachare. 2. By way of this Revision Application, the applicant, who was the original accused No.4, has challenged the order rejecting his prayer for discharge from the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, passed by the N. S. Chitnis 1/3 NISHA SANDEEP CHITNIS Digitally signed by NISHA SANDEEP CHITNIS Date: 2026.09.21 12:04:20 +0530 901-REVN.292.2018.doc learned CBI Special Judge, Greater Mumbai, on 6th March 2018. On 6th December 2019, this Court had recorded that the learned counsel for the applicant had filed an application for withdrawal of Vakalatnama. The subsequent orders indicate that none has appeared on behalf of the applicant and no appearance has been entered on his behalf. 3. Today, the learned counsel for the CBI has tendered a Judgment and Order dated 10th March 2026, passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai, in CBI Special Case No.24 of 2009. He has invited my attention to the details of the accused set out in the said Judgment and Order, wherein the name of the applicant is reflected as accused No.4. The Judgment and Order further reflects that the case has abated against accused No.4, who was charge-sheeted by the CBI for entering into a criminal conspiracy and cheating Syndicate Bank, following orders dated 3rd January 2023 and 16th April 2025, respectively. N. S. Chitnis 2/3 901-REVN.292.2018.doc 4. The learned counsel for the CBI, on instructions, also states that the applicant (accused No.4) has expired, during the pendency of the Revision Application. A copy of the said Judgment and Order is taken on record. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the CBI and the aforesaid Judgment and Order, it is evident that the case against the present applicant has abated. No purpose would, therefore, be served by continuing the present proceedings. Consequently, Criminal Revision Application No.292 of 2018 stands disposed of. ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. N. S. Chitnis 3/3