- (1.) ON 3.3.2006, the following order was passed:- "Respondent No.2 claims to have purchased the house in question on 24.12.1996 from Smt.Gangi, mother of petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.1 falsely set up agreement to sell dated 4.4.1996 in favour of Amrik Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that petitioner No.1 was merely a witness. In para 8 of the complaint, it is mentioned that petitioner No.1 filed a suit. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not aware whether suit was filed and what happened in the said suit. Notice of motion to respondent No.2 for 10.3.2006. Dasti also. Liberty to serve counsel for the complainant in the trial court."
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioners submits that suit was not filed by petitioner No.1, but by accused No.1 Amrik Singh. It is stated that the petitioners are willing to appear in the trial court and face proceedings in accordance with law and arrest of the petitioners is not called for. Without expressing any opinion on merits, a direction is issued that if the petitioners appear before the trial court within two weeks from today, the petitioners will be granted bail subject to appropriate conditions to be laid down by the trial court. The petition is disposed of.;