https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461668 In revision against refusal to discharge, interference is confined to patent illegality, jurisdictional error, perversity, or absence of material, and the revisional court will not re-appreciate evidence. The Court noted that call data records, voice communications, SMS exchanges, witness statements, and forensic material disclosed a prima facie case of involvement in an alleged bribery conspiracy, so the trial court's decision to frame charge was supported by the record. It further held that further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC is permissible and that absence of a Section 65-B(4) certificate was not a basis to discharge the accused at that stage. en-us Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Apr 2025 19:02:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461668 In revision against refusal to discharge, interference is confined to patent illegality, jurisdictional error, perversity, or absence of material, and the revisional court will not re-appreciate evidence. The Court noted that call data records, voice communications, SMS exchanges, witness statements, and forensic material disclosed a prima facie case of involvement in an alleged bribery conspiracy, so the trial court's decision to frame charge was supported by the record. It further held that further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC is permissible and that absence of a Section 65-B(4) certificate was not a basis to discharge the accused at that stage. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461668