SHASHIKALA DESHPANDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a family dispute. Petitioner is the mother of Preeti Harish Kotwal who is the wife of respondent NO. 2 Harish. The petitioner has filed a complaint against Harish Kotwal and two others who are his parents in the 21st Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra being case No. 162/misc. /92 for offence under section 406 I. P. C in connection with streedhan of Smt. Preeti. The jewellery and articles are mentioned in the list annexed to the complaint. She also applied for search warrant in respect of a bank locker No. 665/e at the Bank of Baroda, Santacruz (W) Branch The locker has been sealed by the order of this court dated 19. 1. 1993.

(2.) ALL the three respondents are at present in Australia. Preeti the wife of respondent No. 2 is also in Australia. Both namely Preeti (the wife), and respondent No. 2 Harish (the husband) are Australian citizens.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate although has observed that on perusal of the complaint and copies of documents facts disclose an offence under section 406 I. P. C. which is cognizable, however instead of taking cognizance straight away has referred the matter to the police for investigation and report under section 156 (3) of the Cr. P. C. stating that the facts and nature are complicated. That order was passed on 22. 1. 1993 and it is challenged in the present writ petition. The petitioner has prayed that the said order may be quashed and set aside.