1 S.B.Cr.Misc. Bail Appli. No.4603/2007 (Suresh Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of order : September 27, 2007 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J. Mr.Sandeep Mehta, for the petitioners. Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, P.P. for the State. Mr.Dilip Kawadia, for the complainant. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by counsel for the complainant. Perused the order impugned and the police investigation diary. From perusal of the investigation diary, it appears that the sale was executed in favour of petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.2 is the attesting/identifying witness of the sale pertaining to have been executed by Mangi Lal. The admitted signature and the signatures on the agreement were examined by the handwriting expert and they were found to be forged. Keeping in view the fact that there is prima facie involvement of both the petitioners in commission of the crime as per the police investigation diary, in my view, it is 2 not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The bail application filed by the petitioners under section 438 Cr.P.C. is, therefore, dismissed. (H.R.PANWAR),J. m.asif/-