IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.326 of 2008 MANA DEVI, W/O SATYANDRA NARAYAN YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SAHUGARH TOLA MORKAHI, P.S. & DISTRICT MADHEPURA .. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHASHI BHUSHAN KUMAR, EXECUTIVE OFFICER-CUM-BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MADHEPURA, DISTRICT MADHEPURA .. OPPOSITE PARTIES **** /3/ 30.04.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed against the order, dated 26.12.2006, passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, in G.R. No. 428 of 2005 for discharge. It is a case that first information report was instituted on the basis of the report of the Executive Officer-cum-Block Development Officer, Madhepura, in which it has been alleged that Mana Devi, the then Prakhand Mukhiya unauthorizedly took away the register of the proceeding and did not return and on the said basis of the Executive Officer first information report was lodged and charge sheet submitted. After submission of the charge sheet cognizance taken, however, from the impugned order it appears that a petition for discharge filed and from perusal of the record, the first information report and the charge sheet as well as the petition that there is sufficient material against the accused, 2 Mana Devi, from framing of the charge. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that according to Section 61(c) and 44(13) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, the Executive Magistrate is the custodian of the record. However, at the stage of framing of the charge, the learned Magistrate has only to satisfy about the sufficient material for framing of the charge and it is not required to reiterate the fact at this stage. However, the law provides that if the Magistrate satisfies then there is no material to proceed with the case. He shall discharge and record a reason for his satisfaction. Hence, law provides to give reason when Magistrate proceeds to discharge and not for framing charge. However, the charge can be framed even on strong suspicion. 4. Hence, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. The petitioner may raise the issue before the Court below and if the Court below found that there is no material against the petitioner to proceed with, may discharge at any stage. 5. This application is dismissed. S.A. ( Gopal Prasad, J. )