IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.232 of 2018

1. Dhananjay Singh, son of LAte Madhusudan Singh, resident of
Village- Sher Bijulia, Police Station Biroul, District- Darbhanga,
at present Laxmi Nagar near Sub- post Office in the house of
Prof. Shashank Shekhar, P.S. L.N.M.U. District Darbhanga.
2. Smt. Kavita Devi, wife of Dhananjay Singh, resident of Village-
Sher Bijulia, Police Station Biroul, District- Darbhanga, at
present Laxmi Nagar near Sub- post Office in the house of Prof.
Shashank Shekhar, P.S. L.N.M.U. District Darbhanga.

… … Petitioner/s
Versus
Vijay Singh, son of Late Saligram Singh, resident of Village- Bela Simari,
Police Station- Gangaur, District- Khagaria.

… … Respondent/s

Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER

4 16-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

counsel representing the opposite party.

This application has been filed seeking transfer of the

Guardian and Wards Case No. 3 of 2017 filed by the opposite

party which is pending in the court of learned Principal judge,

Khagaria to the court of learned District Judge, Darbhanga.

The grounds set forth in the petition for seeking

transfer is based on an apprehension of the petitioners that it

would not be safe for them to visit the court of Khagaria to

contest this case brought by the opposite party. Reference has

been made to the allegations which were the subject matter of
Patna High Court MJC No.232 of 2018(4) dt.16-08-2018
2/5

investigation in L.M.N.U. P. S. Case No. 18 of 2017 wherein it

was alleged that the opposite party had, in fact, killed the

daughter of the petitioners. It is submitted that even though the

Police upon investigation of the case submitted a final report

saying that the allegations were not found true and the report of

the Investigating Agency has been accepted by the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga, the present petitioners are

contesting the issues before this Court. It is submitted that the

three children of the deceased daughter of the petitioners are

residing with the petitioners and therefore, in the given facts and

circumstances of the case, it would be just and proper to transfer

the case from Khagaria to Darbhanga.

On the other hand, learned counsel representing the

opposite party submits that, in fact, the Police has investigated

the first information report lodged by the petitioner no. 1 and on

the basis of the apparent evidence which has been collected by

the Investigating Agency, a final report was submitted

exonerating the opposite parties from the charges levelled

against them. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this

Court towards order dated 12.10.2017 passed in Guardianship

Case No. 12 of 2017 by the learned Principal Judge, Family

Court, Darbhanga which is Annexure-R/c to the counter
Patna High Court MJC No.232 of 2018(4) dt.16-08-2018
3/5

affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party. Learned counsel

submits that Guardianship Case brought by the petitioner was

rejected by specifically recording the findings against the

petitioners. The fact remains that the order dated 12.10.2017

was never challenged by the petitioners and the same has

attained finality. It is submitted that in view of the findings

recorded therein, it would not be safe for this Court to direct

transfer of the case from Khagaria to Dharbhanga at the instance

of the petitioners.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned counsel for the opposite party and on perusal of the

record, this Court finds that the only ground on which the

transfer has been sought is the apprehension of the petitioners

that it would not be safe going to Khagaria to contest the present

case which has been brought by the opposite party. The reason

for such apprehension is that the petitioner no. 1 had lodged first

information report against the opposite party for the alleged

killing of his daughter. It is not in dispute that upon

investigation the said case has been closed by the Police saying

that the allegations against the accused perons were not found

true. Report has been accepted by the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, even though the petitioners are contesting the order
Patna High Court MJC No.232 of 2018(4) dt.16-08-2018
4/5

passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate before this

Court, for the present the Court will only take note of the fact

that in investigation nothing could be found against the opposite

party. The apprehension of the petitioners has, thus, no basis to

stand. After going through the order passed in Guardianship

Case No. 12 of 2017, this Court finds that in well reasoned and

speaking order the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,

Darbhanga has inter alia recorded:

“…… Therefore, asking relief for
declaration of Guardianship and for
appointment of legal Guardian under
the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890,
including other Provisions is asking
under the garb of dealing with the
future prospect of the property/assets
left by the deceased parents of the
minor children in question and as
such, it is clearly apparent that there is
complete essence of dealing with the
matter in issue of property of the
minor children names mentioned
earlier and it seems that there is relief
amplicit of the fact related to property
of the minor children in question……”

In the aforesaid findings which has not been

challenged by the petitioners coupled with the fact that the
Patna High Court MJC No.232 of 2018(4) dt.16-08-2018
5/5

apprehension of threat has not been prima facie proved, this

Court would not be inclined to grant reliefs prayed in this writ

application.

This application has no merit. It is accordingly,

dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
avin/-

U