JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for complainant-petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel appearing for accused-non-petitioners on the cancellation of bail. 2. Learned counsel for complainant-petitioner contended that on blank stamp papers his signatures were obtained and subsequently by forging a document agreement to sell was prepared. In these circumstances, merely because a suit for specific performance is pending the anticipatory bail ought not to have been granted by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bayana. 3. Learned counsel appearing for accused-non-petitioners contended that Harjendra S/o Jail Singh purchased the stamps and on three different dates three agreements to sell were executed by the complainant party. It is also submitted that from the documents it is clear that signatures were put after typing the agreement. It is also contended that after considering entire facts and circumstances the learned Additional Sessions Judge rightly granted the anticipatory bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in this case charge-sheet has already been filed. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made at the bar, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances and also perusing the reasoned impugned order, I do not find any good reason to cancel the bail of the accused-non-petitioners. 6. The for cancellation of bail is rejected accordingly.Application for Cancellation Rejected. *******