HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 7 / 2017
Uga Devi W/o Jagdish, D/o Umaram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o –
Presently Residing At Indra Nagar, Sangariya, P.S. Basni Jodhpur
(RAJ).
—-Petitioner
Versus
Jagdish S/o Mangi Lal, R/o – Ward No. 2, Bhat Colony, Tehsil
Ghadsana, Dist Shri Ganganagar (RAJ).
—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Bharat Devasi
For Respondent(s) : Mr D.S. Thind
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
09/11/2017
This Transfer Application under sec.24 CPC has been filed for
transfer of Civil Misc. Case No.166/2016 {Jagdish v. Uga Devi}
filed under sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before
Additional District Judge, Anupgarh, District Sri Ganganagar to the
Family Court, Jodhpur.
Briefly stated, marriage between the parties took place in
the year 2013. The petitioner has been harassed by the
respondent and his family members in connection with demand of
dowry. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a complaint against the
respondent under secs.498A, 406, 323 IPC before ACJM (PC PNDT
Act cases), Jodhpur, wherein after investigation challan has been
filed against the respondent.
(2 of 4)
[CTA-7/2017]
The respondent has filed a petition (No.166/2016) under
sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before Additional District Judge,
Anupgarh in counter blast to above case. The respondent has also
given threats to petitioner on many occasions to withdraw the
criminal case filed against him, therefore, there is danger to life of
the petitioner in case she attends the court at Anupgarh in the
course of proceedings pending before the ADJ, Anupgarh and in
such circumstances, it is not possible for the petitioner, who is a
lady having no source of income, to travel all alone to Anupgarh
for about 400 kms from Jodhpur, where she is presently residing
with her parents.
Notices were issued to respondent. After service, the
respondent appeared before this Court through advocate and filed
reply to the application and contended that the marriage was
solemnized between petitioner and respondent, by way of paying
a huge amount to parents of petitioner Uga Devi by parents of
respondent as per the personal custom prevalent in their society.
He denied the allegation of harassment of petitioner by his family
and contended that the Police, after thorough investigation,
submitted final Negative report against false frivolous
allegations levelled against entire family of the respondent.
It is also submitted in the reply that the petitioner is a
working lady and in her community, each every lady is head of
the family and working as head labourer of the family, mostly
engaging in private employment and the petitioner is also earning
a handsome income so as to maintain herself and fulfill all her
needs and requirements. Further, there is no requirement to
(3 of 4)
[CTA-7/2017]
attend the case at Anupgarh on each every date.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner after the marriage left her matrimonial home
due to harassment by respondent’s family members in connection
with demand of dowry and she is living with her parents at
Jodhpur. A complaint has also been filed by the petitioner against
respondent under secs.498A, 406, 323 IPC before ACJM (PC PNDT
Act cases), Jodhpur and in that case, after investigation Police
filed challan against the respondent and the petitioner has also
filed documents in connection with this case. On perusal of these
facts, it appears that challan has been filed and the respondent
has been enlarged on bail by the ACJM (PC PNDT Act cases),
Jodhpur in Case No.291/2016. The respondent has falsely stated
that after investigation Final Report has been filed in his favour.
The respondent has filed Case No.166/2016 under sec.9 of
the Hindu Marriage Act before Additional District Judge, Anupgarh.
It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that she received
threatening from the respondent to withdraw the criminal case
filed against him and due to this threat, there is danger to her life
in case she attends the court at Anupgarh. The petitioner is a lady,
having no source of income and it is very inconvenient for her to
travel all alone from Jodhpur to Anupgarh, which is more than 400
kms away.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the
inconvenience of the petitioner lady has to be considered. In view
of the above and in light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap
(4 of 4)
[CTA-7/2017]
reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237 (SC), it is a fit case to be
transferred.
Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the Civil
Misc. Case No.166/2016 {Jagdish v. Uga Devi}, filed by the
respondent under sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before
the Additional District Judge, Anupgarh (Sri Ganganagar) is
ordered to be transferred to the Family Court at Jodhpur.
(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.
mma