As per case facts, the Petitioner challenged an order framing charges under NDPS Act, arguing insufficient evidence and reliance on inadmissible statements, claiming he was a mere occupant. He was ... apprehended with co-accused transporting a commercial quantity of Charas after staying together in a hotel. The question arose whether the High Court should quash the charges, considering the petitioner's defense against prima facie evidence. Finally, the High Court dismissed the petition, finding sufficient material like CDRs, bank transactions, and joint apprehension connected the petitioner prima facie to the offenses, holding that his arguments were defenses for trial and not grounds for discharge at this stage.