Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

1. Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. By this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., read with Article227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 12.08.2013 and 06.09.2013 whereunder search - warrant under Section 93(1)(c) of Cr.P.C was issued by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar in CR Case No. 313/2013.

2. The pleaded case in the petition is that the respondent is the daughter-in-law of petitioner No. 3 and she was married to the elder son of the petitioner No. 3 on 25.05.2009 and after marriage they started to live at Dibrugarh where her son was working as a Railway employee. The petitioner No. 1 is the brother of the petitioner No. 3 and the petitioner No. 2 is the youngest son of the petitioner No. 3.

3. On 08.03.2013, husband of the respondent committed suicide and at that relevant point of time, the respondent was at her paternal house at Lumding. She reached Dibrugarh on the next day after the cremation of the dead body. It is alleged that after completion of the shradha ceremony, the respondent started to torture the petitioner No. 3 and she was not allowed to use the toilet, bathroom and running water of the quarter. She, after locking the railway quarter, had left for her paternal house carrying all valuable gold ornaments and other properties. The petitioner No. 3 filed an ejahar before the Officer-in-Charge, Dibrugarh Police Station on 11.04.2013 accusing the respondent Of abetting the suicide. The police, after receiving the ejahar, registered a case being Dibrugarh PS Case No. 447/13 under Section 306 IPC. It is also averred in the petition that the respondent was having an illicit affair leading the husband to commit suicide.

4. An ejahar dated 10.04.2013 was filed by the respondent stating that barely after 10 (ten) minutes of her arrival at Dibrugarh, the accused persons as named therein, namely, the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and some other family members, forcibly took the dead body for performing the last rituals. She had expressed doubt that her husband might have been murdered. Accordingly, Dibrugarh PS Case No. 443/2013 under Sections 384/385/506/34 IPC was registered.

5. The respondent, thereafter, filed a petition for taking cognizance of offence under Section406/120(B)/34 IPC before the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar and seeking direction for recovery of Stridhan and other properties of her husband and to give zimma to her and the said case was registered as CR No. 313/2013.

6. Pursuant to the filing of the said petition, the learned Magistrate passed the order dated 12.08.2013 issuing search-warrant under Section 93(1)(c) Cr.P.C to the Officer-in-Charge, Dibrugarh Police Station, Dibrugarh to search the railway quarter No. 69/H for recovery of Stridhan property and other properties of the husband as mentioned in the complaint petition.

7. Order dated 06.09.2013 was subsequently passed issuing the search-warrant afresh as the search warrant was returned without execution on the ground that the premises were under lock and key. In the said order, the learned Magistrate noted the powers of the police officer under Section 100Cr.P.C.

8. An affidavit was filed by the respondent denying the allegations made against her in the application before this Court. It is further stated that the death of her husband took place on 07.03.2013. It is claimed that the petitioner No. 3 is drawing monthly pension of Rs. 6,300/- on account of her late husband being an employee of railways.

9. Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted by taking me through the petition filed before the Court at Hojai, Sankardev Nagar annexed as Annexure-3, that on a plain reading of the petition, it will become clear that no part of cause of action had arisen within the local jur