ANUARA BEGUM Vs. HABIL MEA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Sessions Jodge has made this reference with a recommendation that the order of the first class Magistrate, Amarpur dated 30 -3 -60 issuing a search warant for the production of the petitioner and the subsequent order of the same Magistrate dated 31 -3 -60 making over the petitioner to the custody of her husband were bad in, law and should be vacated.

(2.) THE respondent, who is the husband of the petitioner, filed a complaint Under Section 498 IPC before the said Magistrate on 30 -3 -60 against three persons, his mother -in -law, his brother -in -law and a relative of theirs alleging that any have keep his wife, the petitioner aged 17 or 18 years and confined her after taking her away from her husband's custody with a view to getting her married to another person.

(3.) IT appears that the respondent filed a petition stating that he must be given custody of his wife pending the case and that if it was not done, it will be difficult for him to maintain the child. This application alone was considered by the Magistrate and he passed an order on 31 -3 -60 that the petitioner was allowed to remain with her husband till the next data of a bail of Rs. 100/ -. The case was then adjourn -ed to 7 -4 -60. On that date no further order was passed regarding the custody of the wife, even though the order on 31 -3 -60 was that she was allowed to remain with her husband till the next date. The order -sheet of the gis -trate does not show that any further order was passed regarding the custody of the wife.