JUDGMENT : S.K. Mishra, J. - The petitioner is apprehending arrest for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 166, 167, 175, 176, 177, 181, 182, 183, 186, 189, 193, 120-B/34 of the IPC in G.R. Case No. 1070/2015 of the Court of learned SDJM, Baripada, arising out of CID, C.B. PS. Case No. 29/2015. 2. The petitioner is retired Government servant. The case relates to his tenure as Tahsildar, Baripada from 1997-2001. The case of the prosecution is that land measuring Ac. 724 decimals situated in Mouza Debendrapur, Baripada belongs to the State of Mayurbhanj and was recorded in the sabik khata No. 65/1 as "Hasilat Madhyasatwadhikari" (intermediary interest) in the name of Dulal Chandra Addy and Jitendra Nath Addy. After passing of the Odisha Estate Abolition Act, as per the provisions of Section 8-A of the said Act, intermediary interest was vested to the Government of Odisha. None of the ex-intermediaries filed any statutory claim under Section 8-A (I) of the O.E.A. Act within the stipulated period of six months. So, the right of the intermediary was extinguished and the Stale Government became absolute owner of the land in question. 3. Suppressing the said material facts on record, one of the ex-intermediary-Jitendra Nath Addy entered into a fraudulent monthly tenancy agreement with the Divisional Manager, erstwhile Orissa Forest Corporation Ltd. on 15.01.1975 for use of the said land for its timber depot. The Orissa Forest Corporation was later on renamed as Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd., On the advice of the Tahsildar, Baripada, in letter No. 2846 dated 19.03.1994, the payment of rent was stopped as the said land has already vested with the State Government. 4. After 14 years of such vesting, O.E.A. Case No. 12/1984, under Sections 6 & 7 of the O.E.A. Act was instituted before the Tahsildar, Baripada by one of the intermediary Jitendra Nath Addy through his attorney, Sardar Pritam Singh for settlement of the land in his favour, which was allowed in 1986 by the Additional Tahsildar, Baripada and patta was issued in favour of the Jitendra Nath Addy. 5. The intermediary, namely, Dulal Chandra Addy died on 24.08.1965 whereas Jitendra Nath Addy died on 20.08.1994 leaving behind no legal heir. 5. The intermediary, namely, Dulal Chandra Addy died on 24.08.1965 whereas Jitendra Nath Addy died on 20.08.1994 leaving behind no legal heir. One Rekha Addy declared herself to be wife of Jitendrs Nath Addy and sold the said land in question along with a piece of non-existent land of Betnoti area to one Ranjit Kumar Mohanty, Managing Director of Minakhi Builders Private Ltd., Baripada fraudulently through a registered sale deed in 1999 and executed the same at Betnoti Sub-Registrar office instead of Registering it in Baripada Sub-Registrar though the land in question situates under the jurisdiction of Sub-Registrar, Baripada. In the year, 1999, Ranjit Kumar Mohanty allegedly managed to get the said land, mutated in his name through Tahsildar, Baripada in a fraudulent manner by using the certificate copy of the sale deed and managed to obtain patta through Mutation Case No. 2418/1999. By virtue of such sale deed and RoR, the said Ranjit Kumar Mohanty tried to disposses OFDC Ltd. from the said land by threat, force, criminal intimidation and muscle power. As such, a proceeding under Section 144, Cr. P.C. was initiated by the Divisional Manager, Baripada in the Court of S.D.M., Baripada, which has been registered as C.M.C. No. 174/2013. The only allegation against the present petitioner is that he being the Tahsildar, Baripada has passed order in Mutation Case No. 2418/1999 in favour of Ranjit Kumar Mohanty of Minakhi Builders Private Ltd. 6. In course of hearing, the learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State has raised contention that the present petitioner allowed the mutation case on a particular day without following the procedure. On such facts, if this Court is of the opinion that even if the Tahsildar-Baripada adopted a wrong procedure and allowed mutation on the basis of registered sale deed executed by a person, who is the legal heir of the recorded tenant of a particular land, it cannot be said that he conspired with the main accused to grab the land. Moreover, the entire dispute is of under adjudication of the Civil Court as civil suit has been filed in the meantime. There is no whisper anywhere in the case diary or statement of witnesses that the petitioner has actually conspired with the main accused to create forged document. 7. It is seen that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Baghara Road, Ward No. 16, P.S. Baripada Town, Dist. There is no whisper anywhere in the case diary or statement of witnesses that the petitioner has actually conspired with the main accused to create forged document. 7. It is seen that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Baghara Road, Ward No. 16, P.S. Baripada Town, Dist. Mayurbhanj and retired Government servant and there is no chance of his absconding from justice. Moreover, it is seen that the petitioner is a man of advanced, at present aged about 64 years. 8. In view of the above discussion, this-Court is of the opinion that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is allowed. In the event of his arrest in the aforesaid case, the petitioner shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the arresting officer. It is further directed that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and co-operate with the investigation of the case. 9. The ABLAPL is disposed of. 10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. Final Result : Allowed