/ 1/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.642 OF 2007 Adnan Bilal Mulla ...Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Shri.M.H. Solkar for Petitioner. Shri.Y.M. Nakhawa, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : 5th May, 2008. P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. By this petition, Petitioner is challenging the order passed by the Sessions Court dated 06/12/2007 whereby the application filed by the Petitioner herein for alteration of the charge and more particularly, deleting the charge U/s.120-B of IPC was not accepted. Shri.Solkar, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that there is no material on record to indicate that the Accused was anyway connected with the commission of the murder of the deceased. He submitted that only evidence is in the form of discovery U/s.27 of Indian Evidence Act and there is other material in respect of Motor Cycle which was allegedly used in the commission of offence. He submitted that Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and therefore, charge / 2/ against the present Petitioner U/s.120-B or 34 of IPC needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3. It is not possible to accept the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Law on this point is well settled. At the time of framing of charge, Court has to see whether there is any material for the purpose of framing of charge and even strong suspicion is sufficient for the purpose of framing of charge U/s.120-B against the Accused. Ratio of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar V/s. Ramesh Singh reported in AIR 1977 SC 2018 squarely applies to the facts of the present case. 4. Keeping in view the ratio of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar(supra), in my view, no case is made out for interfering with the order passed by the Sessions Court. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. All contentions raised by the Petitioner are kept open and will be considered at the final hearing of the trial. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. ( V.M. KANADE, J. )