1. The petitioner has preferred present petition under Sections 482 and 97 after her application under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code ) seeking search warrant against father of minor son (so as to get custody of minor son) came to be rejected by learned Magistrate and the Revisional Court and she has prayed that:-

7.1......

7.2. May Your Lordships be pleased to pass an order or direction for the quashing and setting aside of the impugned order dated 25/04/12 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge of Dhrangdhra in Cri. Revision Application no.15/11 and impugned order dated 06/08/11 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dhrangdhra in Cri. Misc. Application No.106/11 and also be please to allow the Cri. Misc. Application No106.

7.3. During the pendency of this petition for admission and final hearing, through an Ex-parte Ad interim relief, May Your Lordships be please to pass an order for visitation rights by allowing the petitioner to have the custody of boy Hemang for this summer vacation after this summer vacation on every Saturday, Sunday to last till the final disposal of this petition in light of Judgment of Ruchi Maju reported as 2011-6-SCC-479.

7.4. During the pendency of this petition for admission and final hearing, through an Bi-parte Ad interim relief, May Your Lordships be please to pass an order for visitation rights by allowing the petitioner to have the custody of boy Hemang for this summer vacation after this summer vacation on every Saturday, Sunday to last till the final disposal of this petition in light of Judgment of Ruchi Maju reported as 2011-6-SCC-479.

7.5. ................

2. So as to support and justify the relief prayed prayed for in present petition, the petitioner has stated, inter alia, that from the wedlock between them, the petitioner and respondent No.2 have a son born in February 2009.

2.1 The petitioner has also claimed that her marriage was neither happy nor easy. According to her allegation the petitioner had to leave the matrimonial house and that she carried the minor son with her.

2.2 It is further alleged that the respondent No.1 father took away custody of minor boy and since then minor boy is in custody with the father.

2.3 With such allegations the petitioner preferred an application under Section 97 of the Code before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate being Criminal Misc. Application No.106 of 2011 which came to be rejected vide order dated 6.8.2011.

2.4 Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner preferred Revision Application No. 15 of 2011 before the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dhranghdra.

2.5 The said Revision Application No.15 of 2011 also came to be rejected by order dated 25.4.2012.

2.6 Aggrieved by the said two concurrent orders the petitioner has preferred present petition.

3. The respondent No.1 father has opposed the petition.

3.1 He has filed affidavit alleging suppression of facts by the petitioner and denying the allegations including the allegation that he has forcefully taken custody of minor boy.

3.2 The respondent father has claimed that actually the petitioner did not take the minor boy with her and willfully left the minor boy with him when she left her matrimonial house on allegation of matrimonial discord.

3.3 It is also claimed that since the time when the petitioner voluntarily left the matrimonial house, it is the respondent i.e. father and minor's aunt (i.e. sister of respondent father) who have taken care of minor boy.

3.4 It is pertinent that the said assertion by the respondent in his affidavit, is not denied by the petitioner.

3.5 It is also claimed that the minor boy is not in illegal confinement but he is with his natural and legal guardian and if the petitioner wants custody of minor boy then she may take-out appropriate proceedings.

3.6 The respondents have also claimed that :-

“2. It is respectfully stated that petitioner had approached this Hon'ble Court b