JUDGMENT 1. - This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated 8-5-91, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases Court), Bikaner, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charges against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidence available on record against the accused- petitioner, on the basis of which the charges against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 28 and 29 of the N.D.PS. Act, could have been framed and, therefore, the charges framed against the accused-petitioner deserve to be quashed and set aside. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has supported the order dated 8-5-91, framing the charges against the petitioner. 3. I have perused the order passed by the Court below as well as the record of the case. After perusal of the record of the case, I am of the opinion that there is sufficient material available on record to frame the afore-mentioned charges against the petitioner. It is not necessary to discuss the evidence in detail at this stage because that will prejudice the case of either of the parties at the time of the trial. At the stage of framing the charges, the Court has merely to see : whether there is any evidence available on record which discloses the existence of all the ingredients constituting the offences and not to judge the evidence in a golden scale to see whether the trial will end in conviction. A strong suspicion emerging from the evidence is sufficient to frame the charges and to proceed with the trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has considered the case of the petitioner in the right perspective and rightly framed the charges against him. No case for interference is made-out. 4. In the result I do not find any merit in this miscellaneous petition and the same is hereby dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******