IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6523 of 2011 DWARIKA NATH RAI SON OF LATE TAPESHWAR RAI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHRAI, POLICE STATION CHARPOKHARI, DISTRICT BHOJPUR, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT B/12, PEOPLES’ CO- OPERATIVE COLONY, KANKARBAGH, POLICE STATION KADAMKUAN (KANKARBAGH), DISTRICT PATNA ….. PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU.VIG. ----------- 2. 4.3.2011 The petitioner is aggrieved with the order dated 13.1.2011 passed by the Special Judge, Vigilance I, Patna in Special Case No.7 of 1995, by which he has refused to discharge the petitioner. It has been submitted that the entire case has been based on misaccounting committed by the Investigating Agency and misappreciation of the figures and non-consideration of the explanation offered by the petitioner. The further submission is that the Investigating Officer was not authorized in law to investigate the case since he had no authority of his superiors to do so. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the Vigilance defends the order of non-discharge and submits that the same had been passed after full appreciation and these are not matters which can be considered at the stage of charge. I am inclined to agree with the submission of the Counsel for the Vigilance since it is well established principle of law that no mini trial can be held at the stage of charge nor can this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction - 2 - u/s.482 Cr.P.C. proceed to examine the figures to conclude whether accounting done by the Investigating Agency was correct or otherwise. In view of such, I find no merit in the application. The same is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial since the case is old and conclude it positively within a period of one year. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )