ORDER : (Jyotsna Sharma, J.) 1. Heard Sri Amarendra Mani, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the papers on record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.67 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Piluwa, District Etah. 3. As per prosecution case, the applicant who happens to be husband of the first informant/victim, after a dispute between the two physically assaulted her and pushed her down from the roof. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the applicant had demanded Rs.15 lac in marriage which was solemnized just three months earlier to the incident and also demanded Swift car. He extended threats to take her life. 4. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he is innocent and he is not involved in any such incident of pushing his wife down from the roof and causing her any type of injury. He has no criminal antecedents and shall abide by the conditions, imposed by this Court, therefore, he may be granted liberty under Section 438 Cr.P.C.. 5. The anticipatory bail application is opposed by the learned A.G.A. bringing to the notice of this Court that in this case the first informant suffered serious kind of injury on his head and was advised MRI and also suffered fracture of L-3 vertebral body. It is argued that there is direct allegation against the present applicant and in case of such nature, the applicant is not entitled for relief. 6. I went through all the material on record. It may be noted that an anticipatory bail is not a substitute for regular bail. The exercise of this extraordinary powers calls for existence of some circumstances which may prompt this court to intervene in the regular process of law for the purpose of furthering the ends of justice and for preventing abuse/misuse of process of law. I do not find any material to form an opinion that FIR against the applicant was lodged for some ulterior motives or for merely bringing disgrace to his name, I do not find any ground good enough to give benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant, hence, the present anticipatory bail application is rejected.