As per case facts, CBI filed a revisional application challenging the discharge of bank officials (Respondent 1 and 2) from a CBI RC case. The original case alleged a company ... obtained a subsidy amount for a loan from the Directorate of Industries using false and fabricated documents, causing wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer. Respondent 1, the bank's Managing Director, sanctioned the loan, and Respondent 2, the Branch Manager, disbursed it. CBI alleged banking norms were violated as the loan amount was credited directly to the borrower's account instead of the supplier, and Respondent 1 issued a false certificate. The appeal arose because the Trial Court discharged the respondents, finding no evidence connecting them to the alleged fraud, asserting the loan was committee-approved and the disbursement was proper. The question arose whether there were sufficient prima facie grounds to frame charges against the respondents, considering the alleged banking irregularities and the false certificate. Finally, the Court found sufficient prima facie materials against the respondents, setting aside the Trial Court's discharge order. The respondents are directed to surrender, and the Trial Judge is to reconsider framing charges after legal formalities.