Gauhati High Court
Dhrubajyoti Lahkar vs Smt. Snigdharani Choudhury And Anr on 10 September, 2019
Author: Rumi Kumari Phukan
Bench: Rumi Kumari Phukan
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010219892019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet. 1063/2019
1:DHRUBAJYOTI LAHKAR
S/O LATE BIPIN CHANDRA LAHKAR, R/O KAMAKHYA GATE, DURGA
SAROVAR, NARANARAYAN PATH HOUSE NO. 07, GUWAHATI-9, P.S.-
JALUKBARI, KAMRUP(M), GUWAHATI, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:SMT. SNIGDHARANI CHOUDHURY AND ANR.
W/O SRI DHRUBAJYOTI LAHKAR, D/O SRI NAGEN CHOUDHURY, P/R/A AT
THE RESIDENCE OF DR. S.K. CHOUDHURY, HOUSE NO. 18, BYE LANE NO.
06, NATUN SARANIA, GANDHIBASTI, GUWAHATI-781003, P.S.-
CHANDMARI, DIST-AKMRUP(M), ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N J DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM (R2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 10-09-2019 Heard Mr. NJ Das, learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as an opposite party in the DV Case filed by the respondent which has been registered as DV Case No.26 M/2018 and in the said case the respondent/wife prayed several relief along with prayer for release of stridhan articles which the leaned court did not allowed by its order dated 05.11.2018. As against the said order the respondent/wife preferred an appeal under Section 29 of the Act before the learned Page No.# 2/2 Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup bearing CA No.184/2018 with the same prayer for recovery of stridhan articles. Pending the appeal, the respondent/wife filed another complaint vide CR Case No.6597/2018 under Section 406 with a similar prayer for returning of the stridhan articles in her favour and in turn the learned court by its order dated 28.08.2019 took cognizance of the offence under Section 406 IPC and also issued search warrant for recovery of the article mentioned in the complaint petition, with further direction to deliver the article to the respondent/wife on execution of bond. Challenging the aforesaid CR Case as well as the impugned order, present application has been preferred with a submission that such subsequent filing of the complaint case on same ground that too when the appeal is pending before the appropriate forum challenging the order passed in DV case for not returning of the stridhan article, such a subsequent complaint case filed by the respondent/wife is bad in law and liable to be quashed and set aside. I have gone through the document annexed and considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner which support the contention raised in the petition that complainant/respondent has filed the subsequent complaint case despite pendency of the appeal on the same subject.
Let notice be issued to the respondent No.1 by registered post with A/D and usual process, returnable by four weeks.
Till returnable date, the execution of the order dated 28.08.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati in CR Case No.6597/2018 under Section 406 is hereby stayed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant