IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.54912 of 2007 ASHUTOSH CHOUBEY, S/O Brij Narayan Choubey, resident of Village- Chargahan, P.S. Chanpatia, District-West Champaran. .........Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR.........................................Opposite Party. ----------- 3. 19.04.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 06.09.2007 passed in T.R. No. 2318 of 2007/ G.R. No. 798 of 2006 whereby the petitioner’s application for discharge under Section 239 Cr. P. C. has been rejected. It is very fairly conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the charges have already been framed but no witnesses have still been examined. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the First Information Report was lodged against Pradeep Dubey whereas the petitioner’s name is Ashutosh Choubey and the learned trial court has not applied his mind and has not considered the discharge application as mandated under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. but has disposed of the discharge application on the basis of the fact that the charge sheet has 2 been submitted and the cognizance has been taken. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that in the First Information Report the name of Pradeep Dubey was specific but it was mentioned that Pradeep Dubey was accompanied with some other persons also and during investigation, the name of the petitioner surfaced and on the basis of that charge sheet was submitted and cognizance was taken. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned trial court has considered the materials of record. In view of the fact that now the charges have been framed and the trial has already been commenced, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. This application is dismissed accordingly. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J)