SURINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE, U T CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE allegations against the petitioner are that he was not the full -fledged owner of the house in dispute and yet had agreed to sell the same in favour of the complainant for a consideration of Rs. 16,25,000/ -. It is also alleged against the petitioner that earlier he tried to sell the same house vide two separate agreements inspite of the fact that he was not the absolute owner of the house in dispute. It is further alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner received a sum of Rs. 1 lac from the present complainant Shri Charan Singh.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the most it is a case of civil liability as the petitioner is one of the owners of the house in dispute.

(3.) THE bail application has been opposed by the learned standing counsel on the ground that the petitioner is not the absolute owner of the house and he has tried to sell this property without being original owner.