SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 345

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
Sonika Vishnudas Kadam – Appellant
Versus
Vishnudas Haribhau Kadam & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Application No.502 of 2022
Decided on : 05-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Nikhil D. Patil, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Mainak Adhikary, Ms. S. S. Kaushik, Adv

IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of CrPC Section 407 (1)(c) for the transfer of a case, emphasizing the ends of justice and the convenience of the parties and witnesses.

Headnote:

Transfer - Criminal Application - Section 407 (1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Summary of Acts and Sections: CrPC Section 406, CrPC Section 407, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act) Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 10, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 24 - The court discussed the provisions of CrPC Section 406 and Section 407, as well as the relevant sections of the D.V. Act and Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and their applicability to the case. The court emphasized the factors to be considered for transfer of a case, including the ends of justice, convenience of parties and witnesses, and the fairness of the trial.

Fact of the Case:

The Applicant sought the transfer of a Domestic Violence case from Junnar to Thane, citing her forced relocation and the convenience of attending court in Thane. The Respondent contested, claiming the Applicant's husband resided in Pune.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Applicant's husband resided in Mumbai, not Pune, and that the convenience of attending court favored the transfer to Thane. The court emphasized the applicability of CrPC Section 407 (1)(c) and allowed the transfer.

Issues: The main issue was the transfer of the Domestic Violence case from Junnar to Thane, based on the convenience of the parties and the ends of justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the provisions of CrPC Section 407 (1)(c) and emphasized the factors to be considered for transfer, including the ends of justice, convenience of parties and witnesses, and the fairness of the trial.

Final Decision: The Criminal Application was allowed, and the case was transferred from Junnar to Thane.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, Mr. Adhikary, learned Counsel who has instructions to appear for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 and Ms. Kaushik, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State.

2. This is a Criminal Application filed under Section 407 (1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”). The Applicant is seeking the following substantive prayer:-

    “a. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to transfer the Cri M.A. No. 17 of 2017 pending before Jt, Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junnar to Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane.”

3. It is necessary to set out certain factual aspects before considering the rival submissions :-

    i. The marriage between the Applicant and the Respondent No.1 was solemnised on 26th April 2016 at Ghatkopar, Mumbai. The Applicant after marriage resided with the Respondent No.1 and his family members at Room No.4, Shivsagar Rahivasi Sangh Chawl No.13, Barve Nagar, Ghatkopar (W) Mumbai 400 084.

ii. As per the contention of the Applicant-Wife, the Applicant was ousted from her matrimonial house on 18th September 2016. The Applicant filed a Criminal M. A. No.17 of 2017 under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (“D.V. Act”) in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junnar. In the said D.V. Proceedings, address of the Applicant is mentioned as C/o. Devanand Narayan Chalak, R./at Dingare, Taluka Junnar, District-Pune. Said Devanand Chalak is uncle of the Applicant. It is specifically mentioned in the Application that as the Applicant was ousted from her matrimonial house by the Respondents on 18th September 2016 and thereafter she was threatened on several occasions by the Respondent No.1, the Applicant moved to her uncle’s residence at Dingare, Taluka-Junnar, District-Pune, and subsequently filed proceedings under the D.V. Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junnar. Perusal of the said D.V. proceedings clearly shows that in fact reference has also been made to the Complaint dated 13th December 2016 lodged in Ghatkopar Police Station, Mumbai by the Applicant.

iii. The present Respondent No.1 filed Marriage Petition No.A-3101 of 2016 under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court at Bandra seeking judicial separation. In the said proceedings, by Order dated 4th July 2019, learned Family Court at Bandra directed the Respondent No.1 to pay Rs.7,000/- per month towards interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and has further ordered payment of Rs.5,000/-per month towards rent. The Respondent No.1 on 1st April 2022 withdrew the said Marriage Petition No.A-3101 of 2016 without complying with the said order and without making any payment. It is contended by the Applicant that the said Marriage Petition filed before Family Court at Bandra was withdrawn behind the back of the Applicant.

4. In the above facts and circumstances, the present Criminal Application is preferred inter alia stating that the Applicant and her mother are residing at Diva (E), Thane 400612. It is stated that the said Criminal M.A. No.17 of 2017 was filed at Junnar as at that time owing to a threat to her life in Mumbai, she was forced to reside at Junnar and as the Applicant was in desperate need of interim orders under the provisions of the D.V. Act she has filed the case at Junnar, Pune. It is stated in the Application that Junnar is about 155 k.m. away from Diva and that the said case be transferred to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane. It is also stated that the Respondent No.3 is residing at Ghatkopar, Mumbai.

5. Mr. Nikhil Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant pointed out the above facts and submitted that in the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice, the said D.V. proceedings be transferred from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junnar

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
          whatsapp-icon Back to top