JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Kumari, J.

Challenge in the instant petition is impugned order dated 05.09.2022, vide which learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind allowed the application under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code'), filed by the complainant for her re-examination.

2. As per allegations in the FIR No. 287 dated 12.11.2018, under Section 307/34/323/341 IPC at Police Station Narwana Jind, registered on the basis of statement of complainant that on 11.11.2018, at about 7:00 p.m., accused-Sultan, husband of complainant along with co-accused Parvesh and Ishwar, caused injuries to her and thereafter, with the intention to kill her, threw her in the canal.

3. After registration of FIR, investigation was conducted, report under Section 173 of the Code was presented in the Court of learned Illaqua Magistrate and thereafter, case was committed to Court of Sessions. On 31.01.2019, charges under Sections 307,323 read with 34 IPC were framed against all accused. The complainant was examined on 05.07.2019. She did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile on the request of learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

4. Thereafter, complainant moved an application for her re-examination under Section 311 of the Code on the ground that she was examined as PW-4 on 05.07.2019. At that time, she was under false promise and assurance of accused-Sultan, who is her husband. After her examination on 08.08.2021, she was given beatings by accused-Sultan. She was medico legally examined at Civil Hospital Hisar on the same day. Accused-Sultan also threatened to kill her. She wants to re-examine herself to bring on record real and actual facts.

5. The application under Section 311 of the Code was contested by the accused by way of filing reply alleging that the complainant is not legally wedded wife of accused-Sultan. The complainant has committed fraud with the accused. She was already married with one Om Parkash @ Pappu and has three children from her marriage with said Om Parkash @ Pappu. Her statement was recorded in the Court on 05.07.2019 voluntarily, without any pressure and assurance. The alleged beatings to the complainant are denied by accused. She suffered alleged injuries due to fall from scooty and she informed accused-Sultan regarding this on 08.08.2021 through whatsapp call. Accused reached hospital and got her treated. She was discharged from the hospital. The complainant did not lodge any complaint to police for the said incident. Re-examination of complainant is not necessary and prayer was made for dismissal of application.

6. The learned trial Court by following the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Natasha Singh Vs. CBI (State) C.C.J. 2013 (3) 650 (SC); V.N. Patil Vs. K. Niranjan Kumar and others, Criminal Appeal No(s).267 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s) 8965 of 2018 decided on March 4th 2021; Mannan Shaikh and others Vs. State of West Bengal and Another 2014(13) SCC 959; Ratanlal Vs. Prahlad Jat and others 2017(9) SCC 340 and Swapan Kumar Chatterjee Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2019 (14) SCC 328, allowed application permitting complainant to be reexamined in the Court vide impugned order dated 05.09.2022.

7. During the course of arguments, main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are falsely implicated in this case under Sections 307/323/34 IPC, registered vide FIR No.287 dated 12.11.2018 at Police Station Narwana Sadar, District Jind. The petitioners were charged on 31.01.2019. The complainant herself stepped into the witness box as PW-4 on 05.07.2019 and did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. Her statement dated 05.07.2019 was recorded without any pressure or assurance and it was her voluntarily statement. However, after 2% years, she moved an application under Section 311 of the Code seeking permission to re-examine herself on the ground that her earlier testimony was under false promise and assurance of pe