IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.998 of 2011 1. Md. Raza, son of Md. Nizamuddin 2. Md. Inamul son of Md. Ekram Both residents of village- Bari Dhankar, police Station- Sabour in the district of Bhagalpur. … Petitioners. Versus The State Of Bihar … Opp. Party. ----------- For the petitioners :Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Sinha, Sr. Adv. :Mr. Anita Kumari Singh, Adv. For the State :Mrs. Indu Bala Pandey, APP 2. 14.11.2011 The accused- petitioners have preferred this revision application against the order dated 12.7.2011 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur in Mojahidpur (Babarganj) P. S. Case No. 128 of 2010, G. R. No. 2311 A of 2010 by which the petition to discharge them from the offence punishable under Sections 20/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act has been rejected. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 21.8.2010 after getting information that hue quantity of ganja is available in the Mill Premises of Lale Sah @ Mani Kant Sah in Gulab Bigha Mohalla, the S. I. Rajesh Kumar with the police party went there and in presence of the witnesses, the premises was searched and 40 packets containing 10 kg of Ganja each being total quantity of 147 kg. was 2 recovered. Accused Nawal Sah failed to produce any documents regarding the possession of the same and a case was registered under Section 20/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. During investigation it appears that the petitioners were indulged in this illegal possession of ganja in the premises of the mill of co-accused Nawal Sah. Accordingly, the charge-sheet was submitted. Cognizance was taken and the case was transferred to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge for trial where a petition dated 10.6.2011 filed on behalf of the accused- petitioners under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for their discharge has been rejected by the learned trial Court. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of the main accused Nawal Sah which can be said to be a defence version of Nawal Sah. After much delay, the witnesses have stated that the petitioners have taken premises of rice mill for business of Dalada and coconut oil from where the ganja has been recovered. Neither the seizure witnesses nor co-accused Nawal Sah has stated anything in 3 their statement. Learned counsel for the State submits that during investigation independent witnesses have stated that paddy mill of accused Nawal Sah was closed and one of the rooms of paddy mill had been let out to the petitioners for the business of coconut oil and dalada, from that let out room ganja has been recovered. Learned counsel for the State has referred to several paragraph of the case-diary including paragraph nos. 58, 59, 60, 36 and 37 of the case- diary to show the involvement of the petitioners in this offence. She has further submitted that rice mill was closed and to meet the household expenses the godown of the mill was given to the accused Md. Raza prior to a few months from the date of occurrence on the basis of a Kirayanama and since that date it was in possession of accused Md. Raza and his companions co-accused Inamul @ Nihal for the trade of coconut oil and the godown was under lock of the petitioners. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that learned Additional Sessions Judge has considered the material 4 available in the case-diary and has found sufficient material on record for framing charge against the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)