The application for guardianship of a minor should be made to a District Judge having jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides, as per Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

JUDGMENT

Madan Gopal Vyas, J. - The present transfer application under Section 24 of the CPC, 1908 has been preferred by the petitioner seeking transfer of Civil Misc. Case No. 408/2021 (Karan Soni v. Manish Soni & Anr.) preferred by the respondents under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 for custody of the elder son of the petitioner namely Jaksh Soni from the Family Court, Hanumangarh to Family Court, Sriganganagar.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 seeking custody of Jaksh Soni has been preferred by the respondents on the basis of fraudulent adoption deed dated 08.07.2021. It is submitted that as soon as the petitioner came to know of the aforesaid fraud being played upon her, she preferred a suit against the respondents for cancellation of the fraudulent adoption deed dated 08.07.2021. However, in order to harass and humiliate the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 herein preferred a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights being Civil Misc. Case No. 344/2021 before Family Court, Hanumangarh.

3. Learned counsel submits that for transferring the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the petitioner had earlier preferred a transfer petition being S.B. Transfer Petition No. 05/2022, which came to be allowed by this Court vide order dated 05.05.2022 and resultantly, the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been ordered to be transferred from Family Court, Hanumangarh to Family Court, Sriganganagar.

4. Learned counsel submits that an FIR has already been lodged by the petitioner against the respondents at Mahila Police Thana, Sriganganagar alleging offences under Section 498A, 406, 323 & 354 of the IPC, wherein the police after investigation, has already submitted chargesheet against the respondent No. 2 and a case being Regular Criminal Case No. 199/2021 is pending consideration before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar, wherein the petitioner has already moved an application under Section 190 of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance against other family members of respondent No. 2, including respondent No. 1, herein. It is also submitted that the petitioner has already filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned Family Court, Sriganganagar and has also filed an application under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 & 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Srigangangar.

5. Learned counsel submits that as per the provisions of Section 9 of the Guardian & Wards Act, 1890, it is required that the application for guardianship of the minor shall be made to a District Judge having jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides and it is an admitted position that the son Jaksh Soni is residing with the petitioner at Srigangangar. In support of his contentions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court delivered in case of Simple Sharma v. Ishwar Prakash reported in 2021 (2) DNJ (Raj.) 515 and thus prayed that the petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 may be transferred from Family Court, Hanumangarh to Family Court, Sriganganagar.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the distance between Hanumangarh and Sriganganagar is about 60KM only and the court where the petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act is pending consideration, is having ample jurisdiction to decide the same. Therefore, it is prayed that the petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 may not be transferred to Family Court Sriganganagar.

7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. The provision of Section 9 of Gua