JUDGMENT Mr. Vijender Singh Malik, J.: - Hazara Singh, Bhag Singh and Ranjit Singh, the petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No. 393 dated 1.11.2011 at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala for an offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Piara Singh deceased had three brothers namely Darbara Singh, Prem Singh and Mewa Singh. According to him, Piara Singh was unmarried and so issueless. He has further submitted that Piara Singh was staying with the petitioners who are his nephews, being sons of his brother Prem Singh. He has submitted that the complainant of this case is also a nephew of Piara Singh, being son of Darbara Singh. He has submitted that the Will of Piara Singh which he had executed in favour of the petitioners is in dispute. He has submitted that Piara Singh was living with the petitioners and this is a fact evidenced by the copy of ration card (Annexure P-2). He has further submitted that even Piara Singh had a joint account(Annexure P-3) with Hardeep Singh, who is the son of petitioner Hazara Singh. He has further submitted that Piara Singh died at Grecian Super-Specialty Hospital, Mohali and the medical certificate about the cause of his death is Annexure P-4. He has submitted that the moot point at the trial would be as to whether the Will was executed by Piara Singh or is a forged document. He has submitted that the matter is, therefore, of civil nature and the complainant has unreasonably lodged the FIR. He has submitted that the petitioners have joined the investigation. 3. Learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has submitted that though the petitioners have joined the investigation, but they did not give their specimen signatures. He has further submitted that the report of Forensic Science Laboratory has been received which says that the disputed signatures are not matching with the admitted signatures of Piara Singh. 4. First of all, the signatures of the petitioners could not be said to be required for investigation of this case. It could only be said that the signatures of Piara Singh made by the petitioners could be required for the purpose of finding out as to who has made out the signatures of Piara Singh on the Will. 4. First of all, the signatures of the petitioners could not be said to be required for investigation of this case. It could only be said that the signatures of Piara Singh made by the petitioners could be required for the purpose of finding out as to who has made out the signatures of Piara Singh on the Will. Report of Forensic Science Laboratory is there saying that the signatures of Piara Singh on the Will do not match with his signatures on the other admitted documents. However, Annexure P-1 is the report by Mr. N.K. Jain, an Examiner of Questioned Documents and Forensic Expert who says that the disputed signatures tally with the admitted signatures of Piara Singh. The science of identification of handwriting is not a perfect science. The question as to whether the signatures on the Will are genuinely of Piara Singh or are made by someone else is to be decided at the trial. On one side the petitioners are nephews of the deceased with whom the deceased was living and was having a joint account, on the other hand there is another nephew of the deceased with whom he was not living in his last days. 5. In this view of the matter, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find the petitioners to be entitled to bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed and order dated 6.3.2012 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners is made absolute. ------------------