Framing of charge requires only strong suspicion on material; discharge under Income-tax prosecution was set aside.

At the stage of framing charge, the court need not weigh evidence as in a final trial; it is enough if the material creates a strong suspicion or presumptive opinion that the alleged offence is made out. A co-accused's statement that sales recorded in udhar bahis were not reflected in the regular books was treated as sufficient material to proceed under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act. The discharge orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the trial court for fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were rightly discharged at the stage of framing of charge in a prosecution under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the material on record disclosed sufficient grounds to proceed against them.

Analysis: At the stage of framing of charge, the court is not required to weigh the evidence as if finally determining guilt. A charge may be framed where the materials create even a strong suspicion or a presumptive opinion that the ingredients of the alleged offence exist. The statement of one accused that sales shown in the udhar bahis were not reflected in the regular books of account was treated as sufficient material to proceed, and the court declined to examine the remaining evidence at that stage.

Conclusion: The discharge orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the trial court for fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: For framing a charge, a strong suspicion founded on material before the court is sufficient; the court need not record a final finding on the truth of the allegations.

---