IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44665 of 2009 1. RAM KRIPAL YADAV S/O BIRJU YADAV R/O VILL- SANKARATH, P.S. PANDAUL, DISTT. MADHUBANI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 2.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is the Mukhiya an accused in Madhubani Pandaul (Sarsabpahi) P.S. Case No. 35 of 2006 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B of the Penal Code. The allegations are that he and the other accused made illegal appointments on the post of Shiksha Mitra ignoring the candidature of the informant. Those appointed were not eligible to be appointed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant was an unsuccessful candidate. Those who are alleged to have been illegally appointed are still in service and the Government authorities never reckoned their appointment to be illegal requiring termination. Considering all these facts, the application for discharge preferred by the co-accused no. 4, Subodh Mandal the Up-Mukhiya has been allowed on 5.10.2009. Since it is basically a question on fact from the records during investigation if the informant was an 2 unsuccessful candidate and those appointed were still working and none had questioned the legality of their appointment, co-accused having been discharged, these matters can more appropriately be considered by the trial Court itself where the materials collected during investigation shall also be easily available to decide if the materials collected together make out a case to go for trial or not. This application is disposed with the observation that if the petitioner files an application for discharge, let the same be considered appropriately in accordance with law more particularly the order dated 5.10.2009 of the co-accused also. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)