The main legal point established in the judgment is the denial of anticipatory bail to the petitioner based on the prima facie credence to the allegations of attempt to murder and domestic violence, as well as the seriousness of the allegations of dowry harassment.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Sibal, J. - The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.93 dated 24.06.2020 registered under Sections 307, 323, 406, 498-A, 120-B, 312, 313, 420, 506, 34 IPC at Police Station Punjab Agriculture University (PAU), District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.

2. Neha Khosla filed a complaint with the police that on 25.09.2017 she got married to the petitioner; though such marriage was the complainant's second and the petitioner's third, the petitioner misled her by stating that it was his second marriage; at the time of marriage several gifts, including cash and jewelry, were given to the petitioner and his relatives; as per demand by the petitioner and his relatives several dowry articles were also given; on 30.08.2018, from the lions of the petitioner, the complainant gave birth to a male child namely Chirag Khosla; the petitioner and his family members being extremely greedy persons used to harass and beat her for bringing less dowry; on several occasions she was also treated with cruelty; on the birth of Chirag Khosla the petitioner gave her beatings as he expected her to bear a girl child as according to him he would now have to divide his property amongst two of his male heirs; on 12.06.2020, at about 9 pm, the petitioner and his father, armed with a Cricket bat, gave the complainant merciless beatings in which the petitioner's mother also participated; the petitioner attempted to strangulate the complainant and his father put a pillow on her face with an intention to kill her; after giving her merciless beatings she was thrown on the road; on being informed the complainant's father and brother came there and got the complainant treated as also medico legally examined.

3. After filing of the above complaint a supplementary statement was made by the complainant in which she stated that on two occasions when she was pregnant she was given beatings by the petitioner leading to miscarriages.

4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on account of marital discord between the petitioner and the complainant; the allegations with regard to giving of beatings by the petitioner leading to the complainant's miscarriages is falsified from the medical record as the same clearly depicts that the complainant got the abortions done with her consent; on 12.06.2020 it was the complainant who started a scuffle and gave beatings to the petitioner and his parents and in this regard attention of this Court was drawn to two medico legal reports; even if the case of the prosecution is taken as the gospel truth, though vehemently denied, no case under Section 307 IPC is made out and under interim orders passed by this Court the petitioner has not only joined investigation he has fully cooperated with the investigating agency.

5. Learned State counsel as also learned senior counsel appearing for the complainant opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner and his parents have consistently harassed the complainant for bringing less dowry; the complainant's MLR clearly reveals that merciless beatings have been given to her and that the MLRs produced by the petitioner of alleged beatings to him by the complainant on 12.06.2020 are dated 16.06.2020 i.e. after an explained delay of four days casting a shadow of doubt on them.

6. The complainant's MLR dated 12.06.2020 shows the following injuries:-