JUDGMENT :

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.105 dated 23.10.2024, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351 (3) and 85 of BNS (Sections 117(2), 109(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Division No.2, District Jalandhar.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of his wife who is the complainant by alleging that he has caused grievous injuries upon her. While referring to the FIR, he submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and the complainant-wife took place in the year 2002 and thereafter i.e. in the year 2007 a matrimonial dispute arose between the parties and an FIR under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC was lodged against the petitioner in which the petitioner was convicted by learned trial Court. However, later on a compromise took place between the parties and at the appellate stage on the basis of compromise, the petitioner was acquitted. He submitted that now again the present FIR has been lodged by alleging that the petitioner grabbed her by her hair and slammed her face against the wall and caused severe injuries to her and allegations were also made against the relatives of the petitioner. He submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were false because although injuries were there as per the medical record (Annexure R-1) but the injuries so suffered by the complainant-wife if at all were self inflicted injuries because she herself had hit her face against the wall and after hitting herself against the wall, she got the present FIR lodged to harass the petitioner. He further submitted that the complainant-wife is hysterical and suffers from fits. He also submitted that the relative of the complainant-wife is posted in police and at his behest, the FIR was lodged and therefore, the petitioner may be considered for the grant of anticipatory bail.

3. On the other hand, Mr. P.S. Bhandari, learned AAG. Punjab while referring to the affidavit filed by the State has submitted that it is a case where earlier also there was a matrimonial dispute between the parties and as a result of the same, the petitioner was convicted by the learned trial Court and thereafter, a compromise took place between the parties and the petitioner was acquitted based upon compromise at the appellate stage. He while referring to the medical of the complainant-wife submitted that the grievous injuries were suffered by her which is so clear from the main report of the hospital and submitted that the allegations which have been made by the petitioner that the injuries were self inflicted injuries cannot be presumed to be so on the basis of the nature of the injuries so suffered by the complainant-wife and even otherwise also that can be seen only at the time of trial by adducing evidence but it was a case where the allegations were that the petitioner grabbed the complainant and slammed her face against the wall and she suffered grievous injuries. After the registration of the FIR, rather on the basis of the supplementary statement made by the complainant-wife, the provisions of Section 109(2) of BNS have also been added. He also submitted that although there was no delay in the lodging of the FIR but the FIR was got lodged after the complainant gained consciousness and considering the gravity of the offence involved, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for the purpose of elicitation of truth and therefore, the present petition may be dismissed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. It is a case where as per both the learned counsels for the parties, although the marriage between the petitioner and the complainant took place more than 20 years ago but at an earlier point of time in the year 2007, the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section