JUDGMENT :

Namit Kumar, J.

1. Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0107 dated 15.05.2024 registered under Sections 406, 420, 498-A, 506 IPC at Police Station City Jagraon, District Ludhiana Rural.

2. Briefly stated, present FIR has been registered on the complaint of complainant Rupinder Singh Chawla with the allegations that his daughter Sxxx who is a permanent resident (PR) in Surrey, Canada, married with the petitioner-Gurkirat Kalra on 05.03.2022 after meeting him through social media. He claims to have spent Rs. 6,50,000/- (Rs. Six Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) on the ring ceremony and Rs. 17,00,000/- (Rs. Seventeen Lakhs only) on the wedding. During the ring ceremony, he allegedly gave Rs. 11,000/- (Eleven Thousand only) each to the family members of the petitioner as shagun.

He also claims to have given gold ornaments and cash to various family members of the petitioner at the time of the wedding. The complainant further alleges that the immediate family members of the petitioner harassed his daughter with demands for additional dowry from the very beginning. He states that after the wedding, Sxxx took the petitioner to Canada at her own expense and even there, the family members of the petitioner along with the parents and sister of the petitioner demanded a dowry of 2,00,000/- (Two Lakh only) Canadian Dollars from her. Additionally, he alleges that the family members of the petitioner physically assaulted Sxxx. He claims that Sxxx and the petitioner are now living separately in Canada and she has filed a complaint there against the petitioner for alleged physical abuse. The complainant also alleges that the family of the petitioner entered into the marriage with the intent of settling their son abroad and committed fraud against him. Furthermore, he accuses the family members of the petitioner for dishonestly misappropriating the dowry items given to the bride at the time of the marriage.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case as no offence as alleged in the FIR is made out against the petitioner. He further contended that present FIR is the result of matrimonial discord between the petitioner and daughter of the complainant. He further contended that the allegations levelled in the FIR are general in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that vide order dated 07.03.2025, petitioner was directed to join the investigation by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. He further contended that as the petitioner is in Canada, therefore, he could not join the investigation and his application seeking anticipatory bail has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide order dated 17.03.2025. He further contended that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and he is ready and willing to join the investigation.

4. Learned State counsel, who appears on receipt of advance copy of the petition, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that in defiance of order dated 07.03.2025 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, he has not joined the investigation. Therefore, present petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Admittedly, vide order dated 07.03.2025, petitioner was directed to join the investigation by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, however, as he did not comply with the said order, therefore, his application seeking anticipatory bail been dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide order dated 17.03.2025. From the perusal of file, it is clear that this petition has been filed by the petitioner while being in Canada and till date he is not physically present in India.

7. The Kerala High Court in Sou