High Court puts Punjab MLA Sarabjit Kaur Manuke on notice on elderly Canadian NRI's plea

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, August 27

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has among others put MLA Sarabjit Kaur Manuke, the state of Punjab and the CBI on notice on a petition filed by a 75-year-old widow and Canadian citizen.

Petitioner Amarjit Kaur Singh, among other things, alleged that the “MLA from the ruling regime, in connivance with others, by using undue influence, tried to seize unlawful possession and usurp her property”.

Real culprits being shielded

The FIR has been registered to save the real culprits. The state authorities have neither registered the FIR on the statement of the petitioner, nor recorded her statement to date. —Amarjit Kaur Singh, petitioner

In her petition placed before Justice Vikas Bahl’s Bench, the petitioner through counsel PS Ahluwalia, Ishan Gupta and Keerat Dhillon contended that she was the owner of a house in Jagraon. She filed a complaint through her daughter-in-law alleging that some unknown persons were residing in the house and trying to usurp her property. She had, on inquiry, learnt that the respondent-MLA had occupied the house.

Justice Bahl was also told that an FIR was not registered in spite of complaints disclosing cognisable offences. However, an FIR was registered on June 19 immediately on the statement of Karam Singh.

In the FIR, the fact that the present petitioner was the property’s original owner was not disputed and a reference was made to a power of attorney dated March 21, 2005, stated to have been executed by the petitioner in favour of Ashok Kumar.

It is further submitted that the power of attorney, even as per the FIR, was forged and the petitioner had never given any power of attorney to Ashok Kumar. It was contended that the petitioner was a victim in the case. Yet the police neither recorded her statement, nor were her signatures taken for comparison with the signatures on the power of attorney to prove during trial that it was a forged document.

The counsel further submitted only one person, Ashok Kumar, was made an accused in the FIR and was granted anticipatory bail as it was stated by the complainant and the investigating officer that the matter had been compromised.

It was contended that the modus operandi of the persons was apparent from the fact that a false power of attorney was prepared in favour of Ashok Kumar and he purportedly executed a sale deed dated May 11 in favour of Karam Singh.