Case brief
What is this about?
Punjab & Haryana High Court (Archana Puri, J.), TA-121-2024, decided 17.09.2025: Rajni Devi (applicant-wife) sought transfer of Naresh Kumar's Section 13 HMA divorce petition (HMA/587/2022) from Family Court, Gurdaspur to Pathankot, where FIR No.86 dated 17.11.2022 (Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 IPC) trial and a Section 125 Cr.P.C. petition were already pending. Held: wife's convenience is a general consideration but 'not a thumb rule'; with the ~7-year-old daughter in the husband's custody, both towns about 23 km from the applicant's residence, and an undisclosed guardianship petition pending at Gurdaspur, the child's best interest prevailed. Transfer application dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Though Courts generally lean towards the convenience of the wife while considering transfer applications relating to matrimonial disputes, this is not a thumb rule; each transfer application has to be decided on its own factual background, taking into account factors such as earning capacity and financial affluence of the parties, custody of the child, availability and convenience of witnesses, convenience of both parties, and primarily the interest of the child.