Taking strong note of Sonum using a fake name and expressing his ignorance about signing an affidavit without reading its contents, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today questioned as to why action should not be taken against Sonum for committing perjury in the Kansal land-grabbing case.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Vijender Kumar Jain and Justice Mahesh Grover had taken a strong note of the contradictory stand taken by Sonum in the two affidavits signed by him. In the first affidavit, Sonum had stated that he never owned any land in village Kansal.

But in the second affidavit, Sonum did a U-turn and stated that though he had purchased and sold land in Kansal, at present he did not own any land in the village.

Sonum had taken the defence that though he had signed the first affidavit he did not know anything about its contents.

The High Court had issued notices to the UT SSP to check whether Sonum had actually signed the affidavit.

The report was submitted in the High Court today. It states that the signatures on both the affidavits belonged to Sonum.

The Bench questioned the Punjab Government counsel as to how the land in question was registered and as to how Sonum managed to sell the land.

On the other hand, the counsel for the Punjab government clarified that the land in question was not common land.

In January 2007, Sonum Chhibber had given an affidavit stating that he never owned any land in village Kansal.

In the said affidavit, he specifically denied having executed sale deeds number 724, 759 and 293 pertaining to common land in Kansal and declared the said sale deeds forged.

Sonum also affirmed that he has always been known as Sonum Chhibber and not Sonum Kumar as mentioned in the forged sale deeds. Sonum even produced his passport to support his contentions.

But in an affidavit dated January 17 filed before DC Mohali, Sonum admitted that he owned and sold agricultural land in Kansal and that he has three names: Sonum Kumar, Sonam Chhibber and Sonum Kumar Chhibber.