JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Lala, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. This revision application is directed against the order dated 09.10.2015 passed in S. T. Case No. 78 of 2013 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge – XV, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the discharge application preferred by the petitioners has been rejected. 3. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that all the petitioners are C.I.S.F. Personnel who had taken steps for stopping illegal loading of coal and as a counter to the said case the petitioners have been implicated in a false case in which charge-sheet has been submitted after eleven years from the date of institution of the case. Learned counsel submits that sanction has not been taken under Section 197 Cr.P.C. for prosecuting the petitioner which fact has not been properly appreciated by the learned trial court. It has also been stated that the materials available on record has also not been appreciated by the learned trial court before refusing to discharge the petitioners vide order dated 09.10.2015. 4. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer made by the petitioners. 5. It appears that the petitioners with respect to illegal loading of coal had instituted a case being Nirsa P. S. Case No. 216 of 1999. However, the petitioners being C.I.S.F. personnel have found themselves to be at the receiving end on Nirsa P. S. Case No. 215 of 1999 having been instituted against them. The charge-sheet in Nirsa P. S. Case No. 215 of 1999 has been submitted on 31.12.2011 and thereafter the case has proceeded. The discharge application preferred by the petitioners on 11.04.2013 has been rejected on 09.10.2015 without any discussion with respect to the materials which have been collected in investigation or with respect to the case which has been instituted on behalf of the petitioners being Nirsa P. S. Case No. 216 of 1999. The learned trial court has mainly considered the provision of 197 Cr.P.C. before rejecting the discharge application. The learned trial court has mainly considered the provision of 197 Cr.P.C. before rejecting the discharge application. Not an iota of evidence which may or might have been collected in course of investigation have been considered by the learned trial court and what has been observed is that the petitioners being the members of the armed forces have exceeded their jurisdiction in committing the offence without specifying as to what manner such jurisdiction has been exceeded. 6. The impugned order dated 09.10.2015, therefore, in absence of any appropriate reasonings refusing to discharge the petitioners for the offence for which they are being prosecuted, the said order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge – XV, Dhanbad in S. T. Case No. 78 of 2013 is, hereby, quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned trial court to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after hearing the parties expeditiously and preferably within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order. 7. This application stands disposed of.