ARUNABEN Vs. JASWANTSINH BHADURSINH BARAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these applications are filed under Sec. 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short "the Code, 1908"), by the applicant - Arunaben D/o Motibhai Desai and w/o Jaswantsinh Bhadursinh Barad, praying for transfer of Criminal Misc. Application No.29 of 2018 filed under Sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code, 1973"), which was on the date of filing the application was pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla, to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat, as also Criminal Misc. Application No.30 of 2018, filed invoking provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act , 2005 (for short "the Act, 2005") from the Court of Rajpipla to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat or Principal Judge, Surat or any other competent Court thereat, as she is lady aged about 65 years, filed those proceedings against her husband - respondent herein while she was staying at Garudeshwar at the relevant time but the Court, having jurisdiction, was at Rajpipla at that time.

(2.) However, as submitted by Mr. N.K.Majmudar learned advocate for respondent that during the pendency of proceedings at Rajpipla Court, when the Court at Garudeshwar established, both these cases were then transferred to the Garudeshwar Court. Mr. N.K.Majmudar, learned advocate for respondent herein submitted that prayer made in these applications without being amended, which doesn't disclose the cases which are pending at Garudeshwar Court to be transferred, this Court may not exercise the discretion to transfer the same. He has further submitted that both the cases have been concluded before the same Court and they are kept for pronouncing the judgment / order and therefore, as on date those cases shall not be transferred to the Court at Surat. He has further submitted that looking at the applications in both the cases, her address is of Garudeshwar and therefore, there is no need to transfer the cases at Surat Court. However, the said fact is disputed by the learned advocate for the applicant stating therein that at present she is staying at Surat and therefore, she has requested to transfer both the cases to Surat Court by filing such applications since 21/1/2020 and during the time of corona pandemic, they could not be heard and proceedings were not stayed by the Court.

(3.) Having heard the learned advocate for the respondent herein, it is clear that despite the applications for transfer of both the cases by the wife filed in the month of January, 2020, they could not be heard for whatever reasons and proceedings were not stayed before the lower Court, it is not the fault on the part of the applicant herein. Therefore, even if case is concluded by now and pending for the pronouncement, it will not restrain this Court for transferring the same to the Courts at Surat where not only the applicant has shifted but husband is staying there itself since the day one. The stubborn approach of the husband requesting not to transfer the cases, appears to be unreasonable. As such it is in the interest of both as they reside there at Surat.