IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3856 of 2011 BHOLA SAH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 13.04.2011. Heard Sri Sri Farooque Ahmad Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. Some of the contentions on seizure of certain articles, like the cellular phone and the fabrication of the memo in that behalf could simply not be considered as the only truth, because the trial has to go on for holding a proper enquiry through the provisions of Evidence Act to ascertain the truthfulness of the charges which might be framed by the learned trial Judge. The defence like the false implication on account of previous case under the Essential Commodities Act cannot be considered for quashing the proceeding. On the above reasons, the court is not inclined to interfere with the order of summoning dated 7.5.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Muzaffarpur in Special Case No.31 of 2009 arising out of Motihari Town P.S.Case 2 No.302 of 2009. The petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)