Even though Section 329(2) Cr.P.C. contemplates a discharge, it is necessary to notice that this expression has been used rather loosely. As pointed out supra, Section 329 Cr.P.C. operates only at the stage of trial, i.e., post the stage of framing charges. Under the Code, provisions to discharge an accused from the prosecution are available in Sections 227, 239 and 245 Cr.P.C. These powers are available to the trial Court only prior to the framing of charges. However, Section 329(2) Cr.P.C operates at the stage of trial and contemplates a discharge of the accused even after the framing of charges. A fortiori, it would seem incongruous to import the tests evolved by the Supreme Court in State of Orissa vs. Debendra Nath Padhi (2003) 2 SCC 711 under Section 227/239 Cr.P.C at the stage prior to framing of charges, to the discharge contemplated under Section 329(2) Cr.P.C., which operates at the stage of trial i.e., post the framing of charges. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Ratilal Bhanji Mithani vs. State of Maharashtra and others7, the normal rule is that once a charge is framed, the Magistrate/Court has no power under Section 227 Cr.P.C. or any other provision of the CRPC.