ORDER

Date : 18-03-2020 Heard Mr. M.K. Boro, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

The petitioner by this criminal petition preferred under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), has sought to invoke the inherent power of this Court seeking setting aside and quashing of an order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the Court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Rangia in complaint case, C.R. No. 12C/2020 and an order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup at Rangia in Criminal Revision No. 07/2020.

The relevant facts, in brief, leading to the institution of this petition can be exposited as follows : the petitioner and the respondent no. 1 got married on 31.08.2018 by registering the marriage before the Kazi and thereafter, performing marital rituals socially as per Muslim customary laws. After the marriage, they started their conjugal life at the matrimonial house at Pahlanpara, Garigaon, Guwahati. Dispute started surfacing between them immediately thereafter and since 10.06.2019, the respondent no. 1 leaving the matrimonial house, started to live at her parental house. Allegations and counter allegations are made by the parties against each other, which need not be adverted to in this order.

It transpires that on 04.02.2020, the respondent no. 1 had filed a complaint case before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Rangia for commission of an offence under Section 406, Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the said complaint has been registered and numbered as C.R. Case No. 12C/2020. A prayer was also made for issuance of a search warrant under Section 93, CrPC for recovery of stridhan articles and other documents of the respondent no. 1 from the house of the petitioner, who has been arrayed as the accused in the said complaint case. A list of stridhan articles and other documents was annexed to the said complaint, which is also enclosed in this petition at page no. 18. After examination of the complainant i.e. respondent no. 1 under Section 200, CrPC and another witness under Section 202, CrPC, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of an offence under Section 406, IPC by the order dated 11.02.2020 and issued summons for appearance of the petitioner. Upon consideration of the materials made available, the learned Magistrate deemed it fit to issue a search warrant for recovery of the stridhan articles and other documents of the respondent no. 1, as per the list at page no. 18, on the ground that there was possibility that the petitioner might damage the same.

Aggrieved by the said order dated 11.02.2020, the petitioner had preferred a revision petition under Section 399, CrPC before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup at Rangia which has been registered as Criminal Revision No. 07/2020. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup by order dated 05.03.2020, had admitted the revision petition by issuing notice to the respondent no. 1 herein. It was observed that the prayer of stay of the order of issuance of search warrant for recovery by the learned Magistrate, would be considered on the returnable date i.e. 24.04.2020.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner in this petition that the issuance of search warrant by the learned Magistrate was made on the mere asking of the respondent no. 1 on the basis of a list annexed to the complaint petition without any prima facie evidence as regards purchase of stridhan articles prior to the marriage. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner married the respondent no. 1 without taking any stridhan articles from the family of the respondent no. 1 and accepted her only in one pair of wearing apparels.

In the order dated 11.02.2020, no reason had been recorded by the learned Court which had enable it to arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that if a search warrant was not issued on that day, there was every possi