IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.50810 OF 2008 SURESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, SON OF LATE SANT PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SOBHEPUR, POLICE STATION BHELADI, DISTRICT SARAN VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RANJAY KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, SON OF LATE LALIT MOHAN SRIVASTAVA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SOBHEPUR, POLICE STATION BHELADI, DISTRICT SARAN ……………………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ********** 2 16/02/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has filed this application challenging the order dated 18.06.2008 by which the Court below has refused to discharge the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 418 of the Indian Penal Code in Trial No. 3473 of 2008 and the order dated 28.07.2008 passed in Criminal Revision No. 188 of 2008 by which the Sessions Judge, Chapra has affirmed the order dated 18.06.2008. The Courts have rightly observed that the defence of the petitioner that the informant was earlier involved in a case under Section 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be considered as a ground for discharging the petitioner. Further, it is submitted that the evidence cannot be raised at this stage and as such, the Courts has only to examine whether a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner. 2 Considering all aspects of the matter, I do not see any illegality in the orders impugned. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)