SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA,J. - (1.) The challenge in C. O. No. 3245 of 2017 is by the wife against an order, whereby the trial court refused the petitioner's prayer for return of the petitioner's streedhan articles, which are allegedly lying with the husband-opposite party.
(2.) In a suit for divorce, filed by the husband, the wife made such an application, which was turned down by the impugned order primarily on the premise that a criminal case, inter alia under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, was already pending at the instance of the petitioner/wife for the same relief as the said application.
(3.) Upon hearing learned counsel for both sides, it appears that a criminal proceeding is pending, inter alia under the provisions of Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with which a seizure list was filed by the police indicating certain articles of the petitioner-wife, which were recovered from the opposite party-husband. However, it appears from the materials on record that, at the juncture when the seizure list was prepared, the husband had offered to return the articles of the wife allegedly lying with him and the seizure list was prepared primarily on the basis of the articles voluntarily returned by the husband and not upon any investigation conducted by the police. As such, the said seizure list could not be held to be conclusive as to the number or nature of articles which were lying with the husband, which comprised the streedhan property of the petitioner-wife.;