'Overcome Drinking Habit, Care For Family': P&H High Court To Man Accused Of Assaulting Pregnant Wife For Refusing Sex Determination Test
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to a man accused of assaulting his pregnant wife after she refused to undergo an ultrasound examination for determination of the sex of the foetus, observing that the accused should makes sincere efforts to overcome his habit of consuming liquor and take care of his family.Justice Sanjay Vashisth said, "admittedly, allegations arise...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to a man accused of assaulting his pregnant wife after she refused to undergo an ultrasound examination for determination of the sex of the foetus, observing that the accused should makes sincere efforts to overcome his habit of consuming liquor and take care of his family.
Justice Sanjay Vashisth said, "admittedly, allegations arise out of a matrimonial dispute between husband (petitioner herein) and wife (complainant herein). Conduct attributed to the petitioner, if ultimately established, is undoubtedly reprehensible. However, petitioner has remained inside jail since 21.04.2026, i.e., for a period of more than three months. Investigation stands completed, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time."
The Court further added that, "It would also be in the larger interest of the family, if the petitioner makes sincere efforts to overcome his habit of consuming liquor and takes due care of his aged mother and family responsibilities."
The petitioner, aged about 35 years, was booked in FIR under Sections 91, 62, 118(1) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 315, 511, 324 and 323 IPC).
The complainant is the petitioner's wife. The couple was married on 05.05.2019 and has two daughters, aged about five and a half years and two years respectively. At the relevant time, the complainant was about three months pregnant.
It was alleged that the petitioner, after consuming liquor, would frequently quarrel with and physically assault the complainant, and persistently pressured her to undergo an ultrasound examination to ascertain the sex of the foetus as he was unwilling to have another female child.
On the day of the occurrence, he allegedly caught hold of her by her hair, banged her head against a wall, assaulted her with fists and kicks, and caused injuries on her forearms with a knife/vegetable cutter. The FIR came to be registered on 20.04.2026, after a delay of five days from the alleged occurrence.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was an unexplained delay of five days in lodging the FIR, and that although the complainant sustained eleven injuries, all of them were opined to be simple in nature.
The State counsel, relying on the status report dated 01.08.2026, submitted that the petitioner did not want a third female child and therefore repeatedly compelled the complainant to undergo an ultrasound so that a female foetus could be aborted. On her refusal to undergo such an illegal procedure, he allegedly subjected her to severe assault with a sharp-edged weapon, causing eleven injuries. It was argued that the petitioner acted with the intention of preventing the child from being born alive, thereby attracting Section 91 BNS.
The State counsel, however, was unable to dispute that all the injuries suffered by the complainant were declared simple in nature.
Noting that the allegations arose out of a matrimonial dispute, the Court weighed the nature of the allegations against the period of incarceration already undergone, the completion of investigation, and the likely duration of trial, and allowed the prayer for bail. The petitioner was directed to furnish bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, and was cautioned not to extend any threat to or influence prosecution witnesses.
Before parting with the order, the Court added that having regard to the conduct attributed to the petitioner, the complainant may continue to reside at her parental home till the delivery of the child and until she regains her normal physical and mental condition. This observation, the Court clarified, was made "with a view to ensure that no untoward situation or inconvenience arises for the complainant in the matrimonial home during this sensitive period."
Title: Gurbans Singh v. State of Punjab
Appearances: Mr. Impinder Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioner;
Mr. Gurpartap Singh, AAG, Punjab.