Ms. Nancy Thapar and Mr. Sudhanshu Sikka, Advocates v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ORS

W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 1 of 7 $~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 & CRL.M.A. 29263/2023 VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Nancy Thapar and Mr. Sudhanshu Sikka, Advocates. versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vineet Aggarwal, Mr. Suresh Chand Agg, Ms. Bhavya Aggarwal, Mr. Jatin Kumar, Mr. Kunal Chauhan and Ms. Yogita and Ms. Tanya, Advocates for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 26.03.2025 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks the following prayers: “a. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing the Notice dated 10.11.2022 issued by Respondent No. 2 and declaring the same as illegal, being of violative of rules and principle of natural justice; b. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing/setting aside the Order dated 02.01.2023 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Central, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi; c. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby to the Respondent No.2 for defreezing the joint bank locker bearing no. 2659 in Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi, in the interest of justice; d. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby to the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 2 of 7 Respondent No.2 for defreezing the joint bank locker bearing no. 372 in Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, in the interest of justice.” 2. The brief facts leading up to the filing of the present petition are as follows: 2.1. Respondent No. 4, Megha Chhabra got married to Dheeraj Gupta on 13th November, 2013 as per Hindu rites and customs, and a son was born from this marriage on 15th March, 2018. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Respondent No. 4 respectively; Petitioner No. 3 is the sister-in-law of Respondent No. 4, whereas Petitioner No. 4, is the husband of Petitioner No. 3. 2.2. In 2017, Respondent No. 4, along with her husband, relocated to the United States but subsequently, returned to the country in 2019. However, the couple has since separated and Respondent No. 4 has been residing in the United States with her son since 2017. 2.3. Pertinently, in March 2021, a complaint was made to the Crime Against Women1 Cell by the father of Respondent No. 4 (the Complainant), which subsequently led to the registration of an FIR bearing No. 99/2022 under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18602 at P.S. Rajinder Nagar against the Petitioners. 2.4. The said FIR discloses a matrimonial dispute involving allegations of criminal breach of trust through retention of the stridhan of Respondent No. 4, and alleged acts of cruelty meted out to Respondent No. 4 by the Petitioners. Particularly, the following assertion was made: “Mother-in-law Ms. Sunita Gupta took Megha’s jewellery including her 1 “CAW” 2 “IPC” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 3 of 7 stridhan from the engagement hall itself and kept that in her father-in-law’s locker” 2.5. During investigation, the concerned Investigating Officer3 issued notices dated 10th November, 20224, under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19735 to the Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, at Preet Vihar and Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, requesting information on the bank accounts and lockers operated by the Petitioners, for the purpose of inquiring into the aforenoted allegations made by the Complainant in the FIR and also directed freezing of the said lockers till further directions. The impugned notice reads as follows: “Notice U/s 91 Cr. PC Sir/Madam, Whereas it has been made to appear to undersigned that the production of documents/articles mentioned below is necessary or desirable for the purpose of investigation in Case FIR No.99/2022, Date. 09.02.2022, U/s 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Rajinder Nagar, Delhi, Therefore, you are directed to produce the required documents/articles: Details of documents/articles: - 1. Whether any Account has been issued in the name of Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177 ,Gyan khand -3,Indirapuram,Gaziabaad,U.P? If yes kindly provide complete details of account holder. 2. Whether any Locker2659 has been issued in the name of Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177, Gyan khand-3, Indirapuram, Gaziabaad, U.P.? If yes kindly provide complete details of locker holder. 3. The locker folder namely Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177, Gyan khand-3, Indirapuram, Gaziabaad,U.P are alleged in above-mentioned case and Hence, their locker may please be freeze and no one should be allowed to operate the locker till further directions. 4. Kindly provide complete details of last operated of the above-mentioned Locker. 5. Any other relevant details/documents which may helpful in investigation of the above noted case. 3 “IO” 4 “Impugned notice” 5 “Cr.P.C.” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 4 of 7 W/SI Sita Kumari P.S. Rajinder Nagar, Delhi Dated 10.11.2022”(sic) 2.6. The abovementioned notice issued by the IO has been assailed in the present proceedings on the ground that the direction to freeze bank lockers is in contravention to the procedure prescribed for the same. 2.7. Pertinently, notices under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. were also issued by the IO on all the Petitioners independently, seeking information on the Bank accounts and lockers operated by them. Consequently, the Petitioners responded to the said notices by furnishing the requisite details to the IO. 2.8. Subsequently, the IO also applied for warrants of search before Metropolitan Magistrate/ Mahila Court-01(Central), Tis Hazari Delhi, in order to search the joint lockers operated by all the Petitioners at Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar branch and Indirapuram branch. This request was granted by the said MM by an order dated 2nd January, 2023, subject to certain conditions. The said order reads as follows: “IO / SI Sita has moved an application seeking issuance of search warrants of joint bank locker no.2659, Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi and Bank locker no. 372 Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely l) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively, for recovery of dowry articles stating that victim Megha Chhabra in her statement U/s 161 Cr.PC as well as in reply to the notice U/s 91 Cr.PC has stated that her dowry articles are in the possession of her husband and in-laws’ bank lockers. It is further submitted by the IO that during interrogation of accused persons, they have stated that they did not have any stridhan of victim Megha Chhabra. It is further submitted by IO / SI Sita that she has already issued a notice to the concerned Bank Manager for freezing joint bank locker no..2659, Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi and Bank locker no. 372 Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely 1) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively. It is further submitted by the IO that victim Megha Chhabra currently lives in USA and she has requested that on her This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 5 of 7 behalf her father may identify her istridhan during search warrant. Heard. Record perused. In view of the submissions made and as the search warrants of bank lockers of accused persons are necessary for further investigation of the present case, present application for seeking directions for searching joint bank locker no.2659, Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely 1) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively, stands allowed. Further, complainant, father of victim is allowed to identify the stridhan / dowry articles of the victim. However, as the identification of dowry articles/ stridhan of the victim Megha Chhabra is yet to be established, hence, the present application is allowed subject to the following conditions: 1. IO shall prepare inventory of the articles found in the said lockers and he shall take photographs of all the articles found in the said lockers. 2. IO shall prepare a separate list of the articles which is claimed to be dowry articles/stridhan of the victim Megha. 3. IO shall also prepare a separate list of disputed articles. 4. IO shall make arrangements regarding video recording of the search conducted in the bank locker. 5. IO shall put all the articles recovered from the said bank lockers, in the said bank lockers. It is hereby made clear that if during search, any articles which is alleged to be dowry articles/ stridhan of the victim Megha is recovered from the aforesaid bank lockers then the concerned bank manager shall not defreeze the said bank lockers till further orders of this Court. 6. The aforesaid search in the bank locker shall be conducted in the presence of concerned Bank Manager and the accused persons/ bank lockers holders namely Vijay Kumar Gupta, Sunita Gupta, Monika Garg and Rahul Garg. Accordingly, they are directed to remain present at the time when search is conducted by IO/ SI Sita. Copy of the order be given dasti to IO/ SI Sita, as prayed for, IO is directed to serve the copy of the order upon the accused persons/bank locker account holders as well as to concerned managers before the search is conducted in the bank locker. Put up for report regarding the same on 07.01.2023.” 2.9. The said order of the Mahila Court has also been assailed in the present proceedings on the grounds that the said order has been passed in the most mechanical and routine manner without appreciating the actual facts and circumstances. 3. Counsel for the Petitioners, submits, on instructions, that he has no This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 6 of 7 objection to the inventorying of the bank lockers belonging to Petitioners No. 1 and 2––the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Respondent No. 4. However, he submits that there is no valid justification for freezing the bank accounts of Petitioner No. 3 and 4 as they have been living separately from Petitioner No. 1 and 2 after their marriage. He further contends that the marriage of Respondent No. 4 with Dheeraj Gupta took place in 2013, and they have been living separately since 2017. Further, the bank locker of Petitioner No. 3 was only opened in 2021 and has not been operated since. Therefore, there is no reasonable basis to search or freeze the bank accounts of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 4. The Court has considered the submissions of the Petitioners. It is noted that as per the impugned order, the Mahila Court has ensured that, during the search, the IO maintains an appropriate inventory of the contents of the articles found in the lockers after taking photographs of the same. In order to avoid any discrepancy, further directions have been issued by the Mahila Court for conducting a video recording of the search conducted of the lockers. 5. However, the Court finds merit in the arguments advanced by the Counsel for the Petitioners that there is no justification for issuing direction to freeze and search the bank lockers of Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 as they have been living separately from the Petitioner No. 1 and 2. Counsel for the Petitioners has correctly pointed out that the marriage of the Respondent took place in 2013, and she relocated to the United States in 2017, where she has since been residing. The bank account of Petitioner No. 3 was opened only in 2021 and has not been operated since. Furthermore, the allegations made in the FIR pertaining to the alleged misappropriation of Respondent This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 7 of 7 No. 4’s stridhan is specifically directed against her mother and father in law, i.e., Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. Therefore, the allegations regarding Respondent No. 4’s stridhan being with her in-laws cannot reasonably be extended to justify a search and freezing of the bank lockers belonging Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4. 6. In light of the foregoing, the impugned order and notice issued under Section 91 Cr.P.C. is modified to the extent that the directions therein shall not apply to the bank lockers of Petitioner No. 3 and 4. Accordingly, the concerned bank is directed to de-freeze their bank lockers. 7. As for the other directions in the impugned order with respect to the lockers of Petitioners No. 1 and 2, their search and freezing may be carried out as per the directions issued in the impugned order, and a report thereof be furnished to the Trial Court. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of, along with pending application(s). SANJEEV NARULA, J MARCH 26, 2025 d.negi

W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 1 of 7 $~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 & CRL.M.A. 29263/2023 VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Nancy Thapar and Mr. Sudhanshu Sikka, Advocates. versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vineet Aggarwal, Mr. Suresh Chand Agg, Ms. Bhavya Aggarwal, Mr. Jatin Kumar, Mr. Kunal Chauhan and Ms. Yogita and Ms. Tanya, Advocates for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 26.03.2025 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks the following prayers: “a. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing the Notice dated 10.11.2022 issued by Respondent No. 2 and declaring the same as illegal, being of violative of rules and principle of natural justice; b. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing/setting aside the Order dated 02.01.2023 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Central, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi; c. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby to the Respondent No.2 for defreezing the joint bank locker bearing no. 2659 in Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi, in the interest of justice; d. Issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby to the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 2 of 7 Respondent No.2 for defreezing the joint bank locker bearing no. 372 in Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, in the interest of justice.” 2. The brief facts leading up to the filing of the present petition are as follows: 2.1. Respondent No. 4, Megha Chhabra got married to Dheeraj Gupta on 13th November, 2013 as per Hindu rites and customs, and a son was born from this marriage on 15th March, 2018. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Respondent No. 4 respectively; Petitioner No. 3 is the sister-in-law of Respondent No. 4, whereas Petitioner No. 4, is the husband of Petitioner No. 3. 2.2. In 2017, Respondent No. 4, along with her husband, relocated to the United States but subsequently, returned to the country in 2019. However, the couple has since separated and Respondent No. 4 has been residing in the United States with her son since 2017. 2.3. Pertinently, in March 2021, a complaint was made to the Crime Against Women1 Cell by the father of Respondent No. 4 (the Complainant), which subsequently led to the registration of an FIR bearing No. 99/2022 under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18602 at P.S. Rajinder Nagar against the Petitioners. 2.4. The said FIR discloses a matrimonial dispute involving allegations of criminal breach of trust through retention of the stridhan of Respondent No. 4, and alleged acts of cruelty meted out to Respondent No. 4 by the Petitioners. Particularly, the following assertion was made: “Mother-in-law Ms. Sunita Gupta took Megha’s jewellery including her 1 “CAW” 2 “IPC” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 3 of 7 stridhan from the engagement hall itself and kept that in her father-in-law’s locker” 2.5. During investigation, the concerned Investigating Officer3 issued notices dated 10th November, 20224, under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19735 to the Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, at Preet Vihar and Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, requesting information on the bank accounts and lockers operated by the Petitioners, for the purpose of inquiring into the aforenoted allegations made by the Complainant in the FIR and also directed freezing of the said lockers till further directions. The impugned notice reads as follows: “Notice U/s 91 Cr. PC Sir/Madam, Whereas it has been made to appear to undersigned that the production of documents/articles mentioned below is necessary or desirable for the purpose of investigation in Case FIR No.99/2022, Date. 09.02.2022, U/s 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Rajinder Nagar, Delhi, Therefore, you are directed to produce the required documents/articles: Details of documents/articles: - 1. Whether any Account has been issued in the name of Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177 ,Gyan khand -3,Indirapuram,Gaziabaad,U.P? If yes kindly provide complete details of account holder. 2. Whether any Locker2659 has been issued in the name of Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177, Gyan khand-3, Indirapuram, Gaziabaad, U.P.? If yes kindly provide complete details of locker holder. 3. The locker folder namely Vijay Kumar Gupta and Sunita Gupta R/o 177, Gyan khand-3, Indirapuram, Gaziabaad,U.P are alleged in above-mentioned case and Hence, their locker may please be freeze and no one should be allowed to operate the locker till further directions. 4. Kindly provide complete details of last operated of the above-mentioned Locker. 5. Any other relevant details/documents which may helpful in investigation of the above noted case. 3 “IO” 4 “Impugned notice” 5 “Cr.P.C.” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 4 of 7 W/SI Sita Kumari P.S. Rajinder Nagar, Delhi Dated 10.11.2022”(sic) 2.6. The abovementioned notice issued by the IO has been assailed in the present proceedings on the ground that the direction to freeze bank lockers is in contravention to the procedure prescribed for the same. 2.7. Pertinently, notices under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. were also issued by the IO on all the Petitioners independently, seeking information on the Bank accounts and lockers operated by them. Consequently, the Petitioners responded to the said notices by furnishing the requisite details to the IO. 2.8. Subsequently, the IO also applied for warrants of search before Metropolitan Magistrate/ Mahila Court-01(Central), Tis Hazari Delhi, in order to search the joint lockers operated by all the Petitioners at Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar branch and Indirapuram branch. This request was granted by the said MM by an order dated 2nd January, 2023, subject to certain conditions. The said order reads as follows: “IO / SI Sita has moved an application seeking issuance of search warrants of joint bank locker no.2659, Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi and Bank locker no. 372 Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely l) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively, for recovery of dowry articles stating that victim Megha Chhabra in her statement U/s 161 Cr.PC as well as in reply to the notice U/s 91 Cr.PC has stated that her dowry articles are in the possession of her husband and in-laws’ bank lockers. It is further submitted by the IO that during interrogation of accused persons, they have stated that they did not have any stridhan of victim Megha Chhabra. It is further submitted by IO / SI Sita that she has already issued a notice to the concerned Bank Manager for freezing joint bank locker no..2659, Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, East Delhi and Bank locker no. 372 Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely 1) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively. It is further submitted by the IO that victim Megha Chhabra currently lives in USA and she has requested that on her This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 5 of 7 behalf her father may identify her istridhan during search warrant. Heard. Record perused. In view of the submissions made and as the search warrants of bank lockers of accused persons are necessary for further investigation of the present case, present application for seeking directions for searching joint bank locker no.2659, Punjab National Bank, Indirapuram UP of bank locker holders namely 1) Vijay Kumar Gupta & Sunita Gupta and 2) Monika Garg & Rahul Garg respectively, stands allowed. Further, complainant, father of victim is allowed to identify the stridhan / dowry articles of the victim. However, as the identification of dowry articles/ stridhan of the victim Megha Chhabra is yet to be established, hence, the present application is allowed subject to the following conditions: 1. IO shall prepare inventory of the articles found in the said lockers and he shall take photographs of all the articles found in the said lockers. 2. IO shall prepare a separate list of the articles which is claimed to be dowry articles/stridhan of the victim Megha. 3. IO shall also prepare a separate list of disputed articles. 4. IO shall make arrangements regarding video recording of the search conducted in the bank locker. 5. IO shall put all the articles recovered from the said bank lockers, in the said bank lockers. It is hereby made clear that if during search, any articles which is alleged to be dowry articles/ stridhan of the victim Megha is recovered from the aforesaid bank lockers then the concerned bank manager shall not defreeze the said bank lockers till further orders of this Court. 6. The aforesaid search in the bank locker shall be conducted in the presence of concerned Bank Manager and the accused persons/ bank lockers holders namely Vijay Kumar Gupta, Sunita Gupta, Monika Garg and Rahul Garg. Accordingly, they are directed to remain present at the time when search is conducted by IO/ SI Sita. Copy of the order be given dasti to IO/ SI Sita, as prayed for, IO is directed to serve the copy of the order upon the accused persons/bank locker account holders as well as to concerned managers before the search is conducted in the bank locker. Put up for report regarding the same on 07.01.2023.” 2.9. The said order of the Mahila Court has also been assailed in the present proceedings on the grounds that the said order has been passed in the most mechanical and routine manner without appreciating the actual facts and circumstances. 3. Counsel for the Petitioners, submits, on instructions, that he has no This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 6 of 7 objection to the inventorying of the bank lockers belonging to Petitioners No. 1 and 2––the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Respondent No. 4. However, he submits that there is no valid justification for freezing the bank accounts of Petitioner No. 3 and 4 as they have been living separately from Petitioner No. 1 and 2 after their marriage. He further contends that the marriage of Respondent No. 4 with Dheeraj Gupta took place in 2013, and they have been living separately since 2017. Further, the bank locker of Petitioner No. 3 was only opened in 2021 and has not been operated since. Therefore, there is no reasonable basis to search or freeze the bank accounts of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 4. The Court has considered the submissions of the Petitioners. It is noted that as per the impugned order, the Mahila Court has ensured that, during the search, the IO maintains an appropriate inventory of the contents of the articles found in the lockers after taking photographs of the same. In order to avoid any discrepancy, further directions have been issued by the Mahila Court for conducting a video recording of the search conducted of the lockers. 5. However, the Court finds merit in the arguments advanced by the Counsel for the Petitioners that there is no justification for issuing direction to freeze and search the bank lockers of Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 as they have been living separately from the Petitioner No. 1 and 2. Counsel for the Petitioners has correctly pointed out that the marriage of the Respondent took place in 2013, and she relocated to the United States in 2017, where she has since been residing. The bank account of Petitioner No. 3 was opened only in 2021 and has not been operated since. Furthermore, the allegations made in the FIR pertaining to the alleged misappropriation of Respondent This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 01:17:13 W.P.(CRL) 3155/2023 Page 7 of 7 No. 4’s stridhan is specifically directed against her mother and father in law, i.e., Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. Therefore, the allegations regarding Respondent No. 4’s stridhan being with her in-laws cannot reasonably be extended to justify a search and freezing of the bank lockers belonging Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4. 6. In light of the foregoing, the impugned order and notice issued under Section 91 Cr.P.C. is modified to the extent that the directions therein shall not apply to the bank lockers of Petitioner No. 3 and 4. Accordingly, the concerned bank is directed to de-freeze their bank lockers. 7. As for the other directions in the impugned order with respect to the lockers of Petitioners No. 1 and 2, their search and freezing may be carried out as per the directions issued in the impugned order, and a report thereof be furnished to the Trial Court. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of, along with pending application(s). SANJEEV NARULA, J MARCH 26, 2025 d.negi