( 1 ) BY this applicated dated 22. 9. 2006 challenge is made to the order dated 29. 6. 2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Fast track Court, Alipore, South 24-Parganas in Criminal Motion No. 23 of 2003 setting aside the order of the learned ACJM, Alipore in connection with t. R. No. 375 of 2004 whereby the learned ACJM allowed the petitioner's prayer for search warrant against the opposite party herein in the matter of recovery of articles as was described in the schedule to the petition. ( 2 ) ON the demise of petitioner's father the ornaments belonging to her parents were kept in a locker at Allahabad Bank, Harish Mukherjee road, Kolkata. Another locker, being No. 156 was hired by the petitioner and the opposite party No. 1 jointly at Punjab National Bank, Lake Area branch wherein all ornaments left by her parents were kept and the key of the locker was in the custody of the opposite party No. 1 who is fact had operated the locker alone to the exclusion of the petitioner during the period from 16. 12. 1986 to 13. 06. 1988. On 9. 8. 2004 the locker was opened in presence of the petitioner, her sister Chinu, the authorized representative of the opposite party No. 1 but nothing was found in the locker and on that day the opposite party No. 1 closed the locker and the Savings Bank account. The opposite party No. 1 was requested to return back the ornaments but in vain. The petitioner then filed the complaint before the learned CJM, Alipore alleging offences under Section 403/406 of the I. P. C. and prayed for search warrant for recovery of ornaments by searching the personal locker of the opposite party No. 1 in Punjab National Bank at tollygunge Branch and also by searching the bed room of the opposite party No. 1 wherein valuable articles were kept in steel Almirah at 33 Russa road (South) 3rd Lane, Kolkata - 700 033. In the application a list of gold ornaments left by the parents of the petitioner and which were kept in the locker No. 156 annexed. ( 3 ) LEARNED ACJM, Alipore on 8. 12. 2004 upon examination of the two witnesses issued processes under Section 403/406 of the I. P. C. , and in respect of the petition under Section 94 of the Cr. ( 3 ) LEARNED ACJM, Alipore on 8. 12. 2004 upon examination of the two witnesses issued processes under Section 403/406 of the I. P. C. , and in respect of the petition under Section 94 of the Cr. P. C. he, on consideration of the same, allowed it and directed the O. C. of Jadavpur Police Station and Charu Market Police Station for execution of the search warrant by 23. 12. 2004. ( 4 ) AGAINST the said order of the learned ACJM, Alipore the opposite party No. 1 preferred a revisional application before the learned Sessions judge in Criminal Motion No. 23 of 2003, which was heard by the learned additional Sessions Judge, 7th Fast Track Court, Alipore who set aside the magisterial order on the ground that save and except the oral testimony of the petitioner herein there was no document from which it could be found that the articles given in the list were in the possession of the opposite party no and without holding the extended trial and accumulation of evidence no presumption can be drawn in respect of the ornaments allegedly lying with the opposite party No. 1 and secondly, since the personal locker was in the name of the opposite party No. 1 and his wife and wife was not made a party to the proceeding no search warrant could be issued. ( 5 ) MR. Subrata Bose, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is totally erroneous since before the commencement of the trial he searched for conclusive evidence to the effect that it was the opposite Party No. 1 who had been concealing the ornaments of the petitioner, that the learned magistrate failed to consider that issuance of search warrant was absolutely necessary to recover the removed articles since processes had been issued unchallengeably under Section 403/406 of the I. P. C. , that the observation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that since the wife of the opposite party No. 1 was not made a party to the proceeding issuance of search warrant only against the opposite party No. 1 is irregular or illegal cannot be sustained, that the learned Judge failed to consider that in the petition of complaint as well as in the application under Section 94 of the Cr. P. C. there was description of the ornaments and accordingly the order of the leaned Additional Sessions Judge is liable to be set aside. ( 6 ) I have perused the impugned order of the learned Additional sessions Judge as also the order of the learned ACJM, Alipore and upon hearing the learned Advocate for the petitioner (with none appearing for the opposite party No. 1) I am of the considered opinion that the finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge suffers from infirmity. Learned additional Sessions Jgdge, upon perusal of the judgment, appears to have insisted on a sort of the conclusive evidence in support of the petitioner's allegation that the ornaments had been removed by the opposite party No. 1 to the personal locker of the opposite party No. 1. It is the 'reason to believe' that in terms of Section 94 of Cr. P. C. that will guide the learned magistrate while considering a petition under Section 94 of the Cr. P. C. In the context of the petitinoer's allegation that her own brother, the opposite party No. 1 removed all ornaments from the locker No. 156 to his personal locker so that a search could be conducted in that locker as also in the residential house of opposite party No. 1 the learned ACJM, Alipore upon consideration of the averment allowed the petition which in absence of evidence to the contrary cannot be rejected. The observation of the learned additional Sessions Judge is that there was no document lying with the record from which it could be found that the articles given in the list were in the possession of the accused appears to be misnomer because obviously no document was prepared and handed over to the petitioner to show that the opposite party No. 1 admitted removal of the ornaments to his personal locker and to his house. Therefore, seeking for document in support of possession of the opposite party No. 1 with the ornaments allegedly of the petitioner at that stage was unwarranted. Secondly, the wife having not been joined to the party in the proceeding cannot be a ground to reject the prayer for issuance of search warrant. In view of specific provision in Section 94 of the Cr. P. C. search warrant can be issued for recovery of any stolen property deposited at any place. Mr. Secondly, the wife having not been joined to the party in the proceeding cannot be a ground to reject the prayer for issuance of search warrant. In view of specific provision in Section 94 of the Cr. P. C. search warrant can be issued for recovery of any stolen property deposited at any place. Mr. Bose rightly contended that if upon issuance of search warrant nothing is recovered the opposite party No. 1 does not suffer any prejudice, but if search warrant is refused then the very purpose of the filing of the complaint would go frustrated. ( 7 ) THE revisional application succeeds. The order dated 29. 6. 2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Fast Track Court, alipore in Criminal Motion No. 23 of 2003 is set aside. The order dated 8. 12. 2004 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, alipore, South 24-Porganas is confirmed. .