HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 107 / 2015
Seema Thakur w/o Lokesh Kumar D/o Ratan Kumar Thakur, aged
about 31 years, r/o House No.56, Shiva Colony, near Imaliwala
Phatak, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur
Lokesh s/o Roopchand, by caste Dhobi, aged 32 years, r/o
Baginada Road, near Baginada Hanuman Temple, Rani Bazar,
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Deepak Bora
For Respondent(s) : Mr Govind Suthar on behalf of Mr Manoj
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
This Transfer Petition under sec.24 CPC has been filed
praying for transfer of Civil Misc. Case No.476/2014 (Lokesh v.
Smt Seema) filed under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act as also
Civil Misc. Case No.14/2015 (Smt Seema v. Lokesh) filed under
sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, both pending before Family
Bikaner, to Family Court at Jaipur.
Briefly stated, marriage of the parties was solemnized on
19.07.2010. Out of their wedlock, one male child born on
06.09.2011. Soon after the marriage, the respondent started
misbehaving, causing mental and physical cruelty, on account of
demand of dowry. On 01.12.2012, when the petitioner was at
(2 of 5)
Bikaner, the respondent husband and his family members beaten
her, demanded dowry and thrown her out of the matrimonial
home. After this incident, the petitioner phoned and called her
father at Bikaner and narrated him entire incident. Father of the
petitioner was not in a position to fulfill the illegal demand of
dowry. Under these conditions, the petitioner took recourse to
legal proceedings by submitting a complaint before competent trial
court at Jaipur, which was sent for investigation under sec.156 (3)
to Mahila Police Station, Jaipur (South); on the basis of which an
FIR No.33/2015 was registered against the respondent and his
family members for offence under secs.498A, 406, 323, 341
120B IPC, which is pending investigation.
The respondent submitted a petition under sec.13 of the
Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Bikaner. The
petitioner has also filed an application under sec.24 of the Hindu
Marriage Act before the Family Court, Bikaner against the
respondent for grant of maintenance for herself and her minor
son. The respondent husband and his family members are
continuously giving threat to the petitioner and her family
members on phone. In these circumstances, it would not be
possible for her to travel from Jaipur to Bikaner on each every
date of hearing.
It was also contended that petitioner’s father is very old
person and her mother is also a house-wife. It is not possible for
her father as well as mother to accompany her to Bikaner on each
and every date of hearing. There is no one else in the family of
the petitioner to accompany her to Bikaner.
(3 of 5)
Notices of this petition were served on the respondent and
power was filed for the sole respondent. A reply to the Transfer
Application has been filed and it was stated that during the period
of marriage, the petitioner was living with her parents at Jaipur
and despite her several times, she was not willing to come to
Bikaner. The respondent also went to Jaipur with his maternal
uncle on 21.11.2011 but father of petitioner declined to send her
daughter with the respondent.
It was also stated that it is absolutely incorrect and false that
the respondent or his family members have beaten the petitioner
and demanded dowry. It was also contended that it has now
become usual practice that when the girl herself does not want to
live with husband, it is very easy to caste aspersion and
allegations against the husband and his parents. Filing of FIR in
the year 2015 clearly goes to show that if at all there was some
truth in the allegations levelled by the petitioner, the FIR could
have been filed in the year 2012 when the respondent alleged to
have beaten her.
An additional affidavit has also been filed by the petitioner
Smt Seema Thakur on 07.07.2017, whereby it was contended that
during pendency of the Transfer Petition, the petitioner has filed
an application under sec.125 CrPC (No.576/2015) for maintenance
from the respondent before the Family Court, Jaipur Metropolitan.
Another case No.417/2015 has also been filed by the petitioner
before court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.8,
Jaipur Metropolitan against the respondent for offence under the
Domestic Violence Act, which is also pending before that court.
(4 of 5)
Similarly, a criminal case No.33/2015 for offence under secs.498A,
406 IPC is also pending against the respondent before court of
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate No.12, Jaipur Metropolitan.
It is also stated that the petitioner is continuously receiving
threats from respondent and it is causing great hardship to the
petitioner to travel from Jaipur to Bikaner on every date of hearing
before the Family Court, Bikaner, as her father is very old and it is
not possible for her father mother to accompany the petitioner
on each every date of hearing.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
On the face of facts mentioned in the Transfer Application
and the facts mentioned in the Additional Affidavit filed by the
petitioner, it is true that during pendency of this Transfer Petition,
an application under sec.125 CrPC for maintenance, being Case
No.576/2015) was filed, which is pending before the Family Court,
Jaipur Metropolitan. Another case No.417/2015 has also been
before the ACMM No.12, Jaipur Metropolitan against the
respondent for offence under Domestic Violence Act. Similarly,
criminal case No.33/2015 filed by the petitioner against
respondent husband and his family for offence under secs.498A,
406, 323, 341 120B IPC is also pending before competent
criminal court at Jaipur.
The petitioner is living with her parents. It is no doubt that
age of father of the petitioner is near about 80 years. There is no
evidence that the petitioner is having independent source of
income and there is no one in her family to accompany the
(5 of 5)
petitioner from Jaipur to Bikaner for attending proceedings of the
Divorce Petition filed by the respondent.
In the facts and circumstances of the present case,
considering hardship of the applicant lady, in view of ratio laid
down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v.
Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237
(SC), it is a fit case to order transfer of the Divorce Petition filed
by the respondent and the application under sec.24 filed by the
respondent, from Family Court, Bikaner to Jaipur.
Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the
Divorce Petition No.476/2014 (Lokesh v. Smt Seema) as well as
Civil Misc. Case No.14/2015 (Smt Seema v. Lokesh), pending
before the Family Court, Bikaner are ordered to be transferred to
the Family Court at Jaipur.
(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.