Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is charged of offences under Ss. 307 and 144 of Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act. Cognizance has been taken and the application for discharge of the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Magistrate. He has fixed the date for commitment of the case to the Court of Sessions by whom the case is exclusively triable. 2. It was contended before me that section 7 of the Explosive Substance ct provides that no Court shall proceed to the of any person for an offence against the Act except with the consent of the Central Government. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the President of India in exercise of his power under article 258 of the, Constitution, has delegated the power to grant consent to the State Governments. He however, submits that the consent given by the District Magistrate is not consent given by the State Government. According to him the consent which is required to be given by the State Government must be either expressed in the name of the Governor, or must at least be given by an officer not below the rank of Secretary to the Government, to whom the power may have been delegated under the Rules of Executive Business framed under article 166 of the Constitution; 3. It will be apparent from section 7 of the Act that the restriction is against proceeding to the trial on any person, and not against taking of cognizance, or making any further inquiry in the matter. It is well settled that the trial does not commence at the stage of taking of cognizance, and commitment proceeding is also in the nature of an inquiry. The bar, therefore, will apply only when a Court proceeds to try the accused person, without the consent of the State government. That stage has not yet been reached, and therefore, such an objection must be raised by the petitioner before the Sessions Court by whom alone the offence is triable. It is only at that stage that the trial Court will be required to examine whether, consent has been duly granted by the State Government for the trial of the petitioner. 4. In this view of the matter, I find no merit in this application and the same is accordingly dismissed.