Ajay Kumar Jain filed a Criminal Revision before the Allahabad High Court challenging an order of the A.C.J.M., Mathura, which had partly allowed his discharge application by discharging him under Section 406 IPC but directed framing of charges under Sections 420, 506, 386, and 120-B IPC. The revisionist argued that the dispute was purely civil in nature, arising from a registered sale deed and development agreement dated 31.03.2011 between two companies, and that essential ingredients of the criminal offences were not made out. The court examined the settled legal principles on the scope of inquiry at the stage of framing of charge, including the standard that only a strong suspicion founded on available material is required, and that a mini-trial is not permissible at this stage. The court considered submissions from both sides, including reliance on Supreme Court precedents such as Ghulam Hassan Beigh v. Mohammad Maqbool Magrey and Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal, regarding the duty of the trial court to apply judicial mind without conducting a roving inquiry.