901.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
901 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.945 OF 2017
WITH WP/946/2017
ANAND S/O. DHONDIRAM RATHOD
VERSUS
SAVITA W/O. ANAND RATHOD
…
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Ambetkar Arvind G.
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. D.R. Jaybhar.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 05/09/2019
PER COURT :
Heard both the sides.
2. After hearing the arguments, when it was expressed as to how
the question of jurisdiction decided by the Magistrate, in respect of a
proceeding initiated by the respondent-wife, can be gone into bereft of
the evidence which is yet to be led in both the proceedings and the
question of jurisdiction cannot be finally decided at this juncture in
absence of any evidence since it involves not a pure question of
jurisdiction but a mixed one, the learned advocate for the petitioner on
instructions seeks leave to withdraw prayer clause (A) in Criminal Writ
Petition No. 945/2017 and prayer clause (C) in Criminal Writ Petition
No. 946/2017.
1/3
::: Uploaded on – 07/09/2019 07/09/2019 22:53:45 :::
901.odt
3. As far as the remaining prayer clause regarding transfer of the
proceedings to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at
Ulhasnagar, District Thane, the learned advocate for the petitioner
submits that by the order of this Court, already a proceeding initiated
by the respondent-wife for the offence punishable under Sectionsection 498A
of the Indian Penal Code has been transferred to the Sessions Court in
Thane. The petitioner is in a full time employment in Navi Mumbai
and therefore it becomes difficult for him to commute between the
place of his work and the Court in Ahmednagar district where the
present proceedings are going on. Since already one matter has been
transferred to the Court in Thane, it would be convenient, just and
proper for both the sides if even these matters are transferred to the
Court at Ulhasnagar.
4. The learned advocate for the respondent vehemently opposes
the request. He submits that the respondent is resident of Ahmednagar
district. She being a deserted woman facing vagrancy, it would result
in putting her to greater hardship if she is made to attend these many
proceedings in Thane district by commuting between her place of
residence in Ahmednagar and the Court in Thane district.
5. I have carefully gone through the papers. Obviously now the
question of jurisdiction of the Magistrate to try and decide the
2/3
::: Uploaded on – 07/09/2019 07/09/2019 22:53:45 :::
901.odt
proceedings need not be gone into in view of dropping of the prayer
clauses (A) (C) as mentioned above. It is only a pure question of
convenience of the parties which needs to be taken into consideration
now so far as prayers for transfer of the proceedings.
6. Being a woman, the respondent has been claiming
maintenance from petitioner-husband. She says that she is resident of
Ahmednagar district. One need not delve much about the hardship
likely to be faced by her if she is made to commute between
Ahmednagar and Thane for prosecuting the present proceedings. The
petitioner-husband is already in the employment and must be earning.
That is not the fact with the respondent who is asking for the
maintenance from him. In the absence of any other circumstance
which can be resorted to for transferring the matters to Thane district,
in my considered view there is no sufficient and cogent reason for
directing the matters to be transferred to the Court of the Magistrate at
Ulhasnagar, District Thane.
7. Both the writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed.
( MANGESH S. PATIL, J. )
mkd
3/3
::: Uploaded on – 07/09/2019 07/09/2019 22:53:45 :::