Dismissed

Raman Grewal v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024TACR/21/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad examined a transfer application under Section 407 Cr.P.C. to shift a maintenance case from Meerut to Muzaffarnagar. The court rejected the application, holding that no justified reason existed for the transfer and that litigants cannot choose their forum.

What did the court decide?

Transfer application rejected; proceedings to remain at Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut.

Raman Grewal vs State of Up and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:136011

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 21 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raman Grewal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jagdish Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. None is present for the opposite party no.2 even in the revised call.

¶7

The present transfer application has been moved by the applicant / husband under Section 407 Cr.P.C. seeking transfer of Case No. 1243 of 2023 under Section 125 CrPC pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut to the Competent Court at Muzaffarnagar. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶8

Relevant facts in this matter, as mentioned in the application by the applicant, are that he is the husband of opposite party no.2 and their marriage took place on 6.4.2022. After solemnizing the marriage with the applicant the opposite party no.2 without disclosing the second marriage filed divorce petition under Section 13-B Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Muzaffarnagar as case no. 1075 of 2022 which was decided. It also reveals that one case initiated by the opposite party no.2 against the applicant under Sections 323, 328, 498-A, 506 PC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act is also pending at Muzaffarnagar. At present the applicant is residing at Meerut. The applicant has filed a case no. 01 of 2024 at Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffar Nagar. Hence, two different proceedings have been instituted by the opposite party no.2 / wife before the judicial forums at Muzaffarnagar and Meerut Judgeships whereas one case has been filed by the applicant before the Family Court, Muzaffarnagar. The case filed under Section 13-B Hindu Marriage Act by the opposite party no.2 has been decided.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that it is very hard to contest the case by the applicant at District Meerut

¶10

instead of pursuing the case at District Muzaffarnagar. It is further submitted that keeping in view the general convenience of the parties and also being expedient for the ends of justice, the case pending in Meerut Judgeship may be transferred before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Muzaffarnagar.

¶11

The allegations made in the transfer petition have been vehemently denied by the learned AGA.

¶12

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

¶13

No universal or hard and fast rules can be applied for deciding a transfer application which is always to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Pal and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, 1999 (9) SCC 67 has held that in absence of any justified reason, it is not proper and legal to exercise power under Section 407 Cr.P.C.

¶14

A party, either complainant or the accused should not ordinarily be allowed to have the Forum of his/her own choice. A transfer applicant cannot be allowed to make unfounded charges. A transfer should not be granted on a fancied notion of a litigant. Where the ground for transfer is not substantiated and as such does not exist, the application for transfer should not be allowed. It should not be allowed to help a litigant to choose a Bench of his own choice.

¶15

In the present case, the contention of the applicant is not acceptable that the transfer of the case from Meerut Judgeship to Muzaffarnagar Judgeship will be convenient for both the parties. There is matrimonial dispute between the parties and convenience of wife to pursue the proceedings is a relevant factor if pleaded bona fide for justifying transfer of a matter to the place where it is convenient to the wife. The grounds taken by the applicant in the present transfer application do not justify the transfer of case as prayed by the applicant. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. The transfer application is, accordingly, rejected .

¶16

Order Date :- 23.8.2024 safi

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raman Grewal v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raman Grewal v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arif Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

state of up vs Nempal Singh so Lekhraj singhLekhpal

Satish Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hc Vijay Narayan vs State of Up and Another

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Haji Ijalal and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another