Discharge under Section 227 requires only prima facie scrutiny; khat leaves with cathinone and cathine were not groundless here.

At the discharge stage under Section 227, the court applies only limited scrutiny to see whether the materials disclose a prima facie case, grave suspicion, and the ingredients of the offence without weighing evidence as at trial. On the materials showing that the seized khat leaves allegedly contained cathinone and cathine, and in light of the earlier finding that such leaves fall within the NDPS Act by reason of their prohibited content, the accusation could not be treated as groundless. Discharge was therefore rightly refused and the order declining discharge was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to discharge at the stage of framing charge in view of the materials showing that the seized khat leaves allegedly contained cathinone and cathine, and whether the accusation could be said to be groundless.

Analysis: The governing principle at the stage of discharge under Section 227 is limited scrutiny of the material to see whether a prima facie case exists, whether there is grave suspicion against the accused, and whether the material, taken at face value, discloses the ingredients of the alleged offence. The court does not conduct a roving enquiry or weigh evidence as at trial. The earlier order rejecting an identical challenge had already held that khat leaves containing cathinone and cathine would fall within the NDPS Act, and that the question is the prohibited content of the substance, not merely its name. In that background, the accusation could not be treated as groundless.

Conclusion: Discharge was rightly refused, and no interference with the order declining discharge was warranted.

---