HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Crl.R.C.No. 1494 of 2009 O R D E R: This Revision is directed against the order, dated 15.07.2009 passed in Crl.M.P.No. 6127 of 2008 in C.C.No. 386 of 2007 on the file of the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate dismissed the Application filed by the petitioner under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Heard Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the investigation conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID, Hyderabad does not speak of the participation of the petitioner in tampering the marks list relating to Kum. K. Supriya and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to seek discharge for the offences under Sections 468 and 420 read with 120B IPC. A further submission has been made that the learned Magistrate has not correctly appreciated the contentions advanced by the petitioner and therefore, the order impugned in the Revision is liable to be set aside. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor supported the order impugned in the Revision. The petitioner is in-charge of the project which has taken up the process of declaration of result of Intermediate Public Examinations I year and II year during the year 2003. Indisputably, Kum. K. Supriya is the daughter of the petitioner. She secured 16 marks in Mathematics – II B paper of II year examination, but while processing the results, marks secured by her in Mathematics-II B paper of II year Intermediate have been altered to 46. The witnesses examined during the investigation have specifically stated that the petitioner is in-charge of the project and he is responsible to ensure accuracy of the process of declaring the result of the candidates appeared for Board of Intermediate Examination in the year 2003. The statement of Sri S. Krishna Prasad recorded by the police during the course of investigation, details the nature of work, which was required to be carried out by M/s CMC Limited. Since the petitioner is the Project leader, prima facie, it is his responsibility to verify the accuracy in declaration of results of the candidates, who appeared for Intermediate examination. The crystallized judicial view is that at the stage of framing charge, the Court has to prima facie consider whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. The Court is not required to appreciate the evidence to conclude whether the materials produced are sufficient or not for convicting the accused. In Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi v. Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya[1], the Supreme Court held that at the time of framing charges, having regard to Sections 227 and 228 Cr.P.C., the Court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record with a view of finding out if the facts emerging there from taken at their face value disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence. The Court may for this limited purpose to shift the evidence, as it cannot be expected even at the initial stage to accept all that the prosecution states as gospel truth even if it is opposed to commonsense or broad probabilities of the case. The statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation indicate that the petitioner was in-charge of the project which had to assure the accuracy of the declaration of results of the Intermediate Board Examination. The Compact Disc containing the marks secured by Kum. K. Supriya indicates tampering of the marks from 16 to 46 and thereby making her as passed. The material brought on record, prima facie, speaks of the involvement of the petitioner in tampering the Compact Disc. Therefore, the trial Court is justified in dismissing the Application. I do not see any valid ground to interfere with the order impugned in the Revision. The Criminal Revision Case is accordingly dismissed. ------------------------------------ (B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J) 15th September 2009 ksld [1] (1990) 4 SCC 76