(1) ON 20/02/1985 in Transfer Ptitions (Cri) Nos. 71 and 72 of 1984 we madethe following order: "IT is agreed by boththe parties that ailthe cases Fled by each of them againstthe other will forthwith be withdrawn. lt is aiso agreed that Mr. Arvind Kumar will pay a sum of Rs. 200.00 per month regularly forthe maintenance of their oniy son Nipun.the pay- ments shall commence from March l, 1985.the parties hve undertaken to withdraw ailthe cases.the ptitions are disposed of accordingly." (2) ONE ofthe cases which was withdrawn bythe wife pursuant to our order was a complaint of theft made by her which was then under investigation. She along with some others had aiso fled writ ptition complaining thatthe police were not investigating into her complaint. In that writ ptition appropriate directions were given andthe writ ptition was disposed of. Subsquent to our order dated 20/02/1985 the wife has filed a civil suit for recovery ofthe amount of dowry said to hve been paid tothe husband and for recovery of certain articles of furniture, utensils and jewellery said to belong to her v^hich according to her allga- tion had been taken away bythe husband.the husband has moved this Court contending thatthe filing ofthe suit is in breach of our order dated 20/02/1985 and thereforethe wife should be punished for contempt. We do not think that we can do so. lt is true thatthe criminal case was launched by her onthe allgation of theft ofthe very articles which she now seeks to recover by filing a civil suit. We do not see how th filing ofthe suit is in breach of our order and howthe suit can possib- ly be said to be barred by our order. There is no ment in thse ptitions which are accordingly dismissed.