IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1326 of 2007 BHOLA SAH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 04/ 27.03.2009 A deed was executed in the name of Manjula Devi and petitioner is a witness of that deed. Manjula Devi has been shown as wife of Kailash Mahaseth. Actually Kailash Mahaseth was one of the sharers of the property involved in the deed in the nature of agreement of sale and only his heirs including wife could be entitled to transfer his land after his death. Capacity of Manjula Devi as wife of Kailash Mahaseth is denied. It is said Manjula Devi was not the widow of Kailash Mahaseth rather wife of Amarnath Mahaseth. According to the learned counsel transaction whatever appeared or done was not in between Manjula Devi and Bharti Kumari. Petitioner has no interest in execution of the deed so any accusation levelled against him for the act of Bharti Kumari and Manjula Devi is not justified, but I do not agree with the submission advanced on behalf of the learned counsel that no doubt if Manjula Devi is really widow of Kailash Nath Mahaseth, no offence is made out. If she is not the widow of Kailash Mahaseth, liability is upon her and as well as on identifier and other witnesses of the deed. I do not find it a fit case for quashing the order dated 22.07.2008 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Darbhanga in T.R. No. 1756 of 2006. This application is accordingly dismissed. S.Sb/- (Mandhata Singh, J.)