IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8541 of 2010 JANARDAN PATHAK S/O LATE RAM BADAN PATHAK R/O VILLAGE BHAWADIH POLICE STATION- KARGHAR, DISTRICT- ROHTAS AT SASARAM Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. HRIDYA NAND PATHAK S/O LATE RAM BRAT PATHAK R/O VILLAGE- BHAWADIH P.S. KARGHAR (SIDHI) DISTT. ROHTAS AT SASARAM ----------- 2. 01.12.2010 Heard the parties. The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 25.11.2009 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, F.T.C. IV, Rohtas in S.T. No. 384/08, by which he has framed charges under Section 395 and 397 I.P.C. even against the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner is that he was not named in the First Information Report but subsequently protest was filed by the informant, wherein, the petitioner and his sons were named and the charge sheet was submitted in the matter even against the petitioner. In the meanwhile the petitioner filed a writ application wherein it was ordered that an independent investigation be done in the matter in which an officer of the rank of A.S.P. reported that the petitioner had been filed implicated for reasons of land dispute. However, this document was not looked into by the Trial Court at the stage of framing of charge. It is well known that at the stage of framing of charge even if strong suspicion is against an accused it is enough to put the person on trial whereas in this case there was ample material against the petitioner to warrant putting him on trial. In view of such the application is dismissed. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )