1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICTURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Ram Dayal Jatav. Versus State of Rajasthan. S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.618/2007 ... Date of Order: July 20, 2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr. M.S. Amrawat, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Upadhyaya, Public Prosecutor for the State. BY THE COURT: Perused the memo of the revision petition. By the instant revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22-12-2006 passed by the Special Judge, Sessions Court (Prevention of Anti-Corruption Act), Udaipur (for short, “the trial Court” hereinafter), whereby the trial Court framed charges against the petitioner for the offences under Section 7, 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. I have perused the impugned order. In my view, on the basis of the material placed before the trial Court, the trial Court prima facie came to the 2 conclusion that there is ground to presume that the petitioner committed the offences noticed above and framed the charges. It is settled law that at the stage of framing the charge, the evidence is not required to be meticulously analysed and weighed and it is not required whether the material is sufficient to hold conviction and what is required is that there is a ground to presume that the accused has committed the offence. Such finding has been recorded by the trial Court. In this view of the matter, no case for interference is made out. The criminal revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. The stay petition also stands dismissed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs