IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28014 of 2010 SWAMI TRIYOGANAND JI MAHARAJ @ RAM NARAIN BIND Ji Maharaj S/o late Raghunath Bind, Chella of late Swami Sheo Dharmanand Ji Maharaj, Ashram-Cum-Resident Brahm Vidhyalay Chhotaka Rajpur, P.S. Simari, District - Buxar. Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ------ 2/ 13.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Appellant Swami Shiv Dharmanandjee Maharaj died then petitioner and complainant came forward with their claim to be the real heir Mahanth of Matth. Anyhow both were allowed to contest second appeal but in conformity with the pleading of original appellant, Swami Shiv Dhrmanandjee Maharaj. In pendency of the appeal, two agreement to sells dated 07.03.2009 and 18.09.2009 allegedly executed by complainant in favour of Rama Singh and Rajeev Ranjan Kumar Singh for the land of Matth situated at different places filed. Specifically, it is alleged that both the deeds are forged created by this petitioner and produced by this petitioner to malign the reputation, while he never signed both the deeds. That is replied that for the specific performance transferees of deeds approached the Courts of their jurisdiction and the case is pending, otherwise it is submitted by the learned counsel that petitioner is not beneficiary nor there is any material to connect that if really deed was forged one then create manufactured by this petitioner and at this stage presuming the same forged, any liability can be fixed upon this petitioner for refusal of anticipatory bail. Stress is made that deeds are genuine one. More over, in 2 discussed circumstances, it can be said that same are used by this petitioner and that also does not justify refusal of anticipatory bail. Further, it is submitted that claim is there of two persons. None of them can be prohibited to place his claim indirectly by fixing criminal liability. Counsels for the Complainant and State both failed to connect this petitioner with direct beneficiary otherwise also in second appeal both the deeds in no way can favour any of the parties. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in connection with Complaint Case No. 1157 (C) of 2009 and Trial No. 3043 of 2009 above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M., Ist Class, Patna subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)