As per case facts, a crime was registered against four accused for conspiring to evade tax liability for Gurukul Coaching Classes by manipulating records during an Income Tax Survey. Accused ... 1 and 2, Income Tax Officers, allegedly colluded with Accused 4, a Tax Consultant, to help Accused 3, a partner of the classes, cause wrongful loss to the government, with Accused 1 also allegedly receiving a kickback. The petitioners appealed against the Special Judge's order denying their discharge application, arguing no conspiracy, tax evasion, or sufficient evidence. The question arose whether the chargesheet contained sufficient prima facie material to frame charges and proceed to trial, and if the trial court's order was legal and proper. Finally, the Court found prima facie material against all petitioners, including statements from Income Tax Officials and coaching class staff, indicating unauthorized survey participation, discrepancies, and a bribe. Upholding the trial court's order, the High Court dismissed both revision applications, affirming the decision to proceed with the trial.