led to the bank sanctioning and disbursing a loan amount of Rs. 10 lakhs to A-2 and A-3. It is on an appreciation of these aspects, that the court below has come to the considered conclusion that at this stage the court has found out that there is prima facie case to proceed against the accused including A-3 and that therefore there is no requirement to follow the standard of proof required at the time of the final stage in the trial, which is called for only for assessing the guilt or otherwise of the accused at the final stage and that what is required only is that if there is prima facie case against the accused to proceed with the matter so as to frame charge against the accused, prayer for discharge cannot be allowed. In this view of the matter, the court below has rejected the plea for discharge of A-3. This Court in the case Mani v. Joseph reported in 1999 (3) KLT 49, para 11, has conclusively held that the evidence adduced by the complainant under Sec.244 Cr.P.C. need not be appreciated by the Magistrate by applying the standard of test, which has to be adopted by the Magistrate at the time of appreciating the evidence for finding out whether the accused is guilty of the offence or not at the final stage of the case and that the attempt of the Magistrate at the present stage is to be limited to
