Judgment By Court : Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. This revision application is directed against the order dated 20.06.2001 passed by the then Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in G.R. No.5 of 1998 (T.R. No.165 of 2001) whereby and whereunder application for discharge filed on behalf of the petitioner was rejected. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that on receiving secret information that the petitioner has stored K. Oil in his residence-cum-factory, a raid was laid and on search being made, 350 liters of K. Oil was recovered. On that basis, case was registered as Giridih (T) P.S. Case No.65 of 1998 under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is true that 350 liters of K. Oil was recovered from the courtyard of the house-cum-factory of the petitioner but it never belonged to this petitioner rather it belonged to one Lakhan Das, a license retailer of K. Oil, who had kept there finding the place to be quite safe as the Rickshaw on which it was being carried, got punctured. 4. The said plea seems to be defence of the petitioner, which cannot be looked into, at the time of discharge. At the time of discharge, what has to be seen is that whether there has been sufficient material for proceeding with the case or not? 5. Admittedly, 350 liters of K. Oil was recovered, which as per storage limit fixed under the Bihar Trade Article Licenses (Unification) Order, 1984 was beyond storage limit and as such, sufficient material was there to frame the charge and accordingly, the trial court has not committed any illegality in refusing to discharge the petitioner from the accusation permissible under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. 6. Thus, I do not find any merit and hence, this application stands dismissed.