Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010050682025 2025:GAU-AS:2769 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./317/2025 MRS DIVYANEE DAS W/O DIPON SAIKIA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT- HOUSE NO.106, NIRMALA NILOY, KC ROAD, CHATRIBARI, PS PALTANBAZAR,GUWAHATI, 781008 VERSUS DIPON SAIKIA AND 2 ORS. SON OF HITESHWAR SAIKIA R/O VILL-CHAKORIGAON, TOWARDS MAJ-PATHORI, DIMORUGURI, PS ITASALI, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782003 2:KALPANA SAIKIA W/O HITESHWAR SAIKIA R/O VILL-CHAKORIGAON TOWARDS MAJ-PATHORI DIMORUGURI PS ITASALI DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782003 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR GOVT. OF ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J KALITA, MR SOHAING Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 17.03.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. J. Kalita for the petitioner ‘X’. 2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking interference of this Court in the proceeding of CR Case No. 609/2024 pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, (Magistrate/Trial Court for short). Kamrup at Guwahati. 3. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent No. 3. 4. This case was brought up by the petitioner against the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. The respondent No. 1 is the petitioner’s husband and respondent No. 2 is the mother-in-law of the petitioner. The case was registered under Sections 316 of the BNS, 2023, basically for recovery of streedhan articles of the petitioner. 5. The petitioner has been threatened by her husband and her mother-in-law that they will set ablaze all her streedhan articles which are in their custody. It is submitted that the petitioner is at present residing in her parental home and her streedhan articles are in her in-law’s house. There are many valuable streedhan articles and the list of streedhan articles are marked as Annexure-2 of the petition. Cognizance was taken against the respondents but no order was passed from 21.09.2024 onwards for recovery of her streedhan articles, or no search warrant was issued to identify and recover streedhan articles of the petitioner lying in the respondent’s house. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioner has submitted all the documents pertaining to purchase of the streedhan articles but the learned Trial Court has ignored these documents and a date was fixed after more than 21/2 months for service of notice on the respondents Nos. 1 & 2. 7. The petitioner is hesitant to get her streedhan articles recovered from her matrimonial home without the aid of the police as she is apprehending aggressive resistance by the respondents. 8. I have considered the submissions at the Bar. 9. The petitioner has brought up this case against the respondents solely for recovery of streedhan Page No.# 3/3 articles. It is apparent that on a prima facie case, cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate. 10. The Magistrate is therefore directed to pass necessary orders for identification and recovery of the streedhan articles of the petitioner, without delay and under proper procedure of law. 11. In terms of the above observation, this petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant