https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460780 At the stage of framing charge under Section 227 CrPC, the court must only determine whether the material discloses sufficient ground to proceed; it cannot weigh evidence, compare rival versions, or assess the reliability of competing dying declarations as if conducting a trial. Strong suspicion may justify a charge, but factual conclusions on the acceptability of evidence are reserved for trial. Applying that threshold, the High Court was not entitled to prefer one dying declaration over another or sustain discharge on an unsupported finding about the deceased's condition. The impugned discharge was therefore unsustainable because it rested on premature appreciation of evidence. en-us Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:20:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460780 At the stage of framing charge under Section 227 CrPC, the court must only determine whether the material discloses sufficient ground to proceed; it cannot weigh evidence, compare rival versions, or assess the reliability of competing dying declarations as if conducting a trial. Strong suspicion may justify a charge, but factual conclusions on the acceptability of evidence are reserved for trial. Applying that threshold, the High Court was not entitled to prefer one dying declaration over another or sustain discharge on an unsupported finding about the deceased's condition. The impugned discharge was therefore unsustainable because it rested on premature appreciation of evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460780