IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI

nd

ON THE 2 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 1425 of 2025 MINAKSHI Versus BALRAM@ ANKIT MEHAR Appearance:

Shri Manoj Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Shraddha Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.

ORDER The present application has been filed under Section 24 of CPC for transfer of proceedings in HMA No.1889/2024 pending before the Family Court at Indore to Shujalpur.

2. The applicant and respondent solemnized marriage by Hindu rites on 22.06.2023. There is no issue out of their wedlock. After solemnization of marriage, there was a dispute between the applicant and respondent because of which husband filed a petition under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court for getting decree of divorce against the applicant. The same was filed on 08.09.2024. After issuance of notice in the same and appearing before the Family Court at Indore, the applicant registered an F.I.R. under Section 498A of IPC on 13.01.2025 at Shujalpur.

3. The present application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that as, at Shujalpur, proceedings under Section 498A are pending and that, there is a distance of about 160 kms. between Shujalpur and Indore, she is not able to come to attend the court proceedings at Indore and it is very inconvenient for her to attend the court proceedings at Indore. It has also been submitted that she has to incur expenditure of about Rs.4000-5000/- for each date and there is no source of earning for her because of which this application has been filed for transfer of proceedings to Shujalpur.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant being the wife, in matrimonial cases, convenience of wife should be taken into consideration and looking to the circumstances of the present case, the proceedings should be transferred to Shujalpur.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent points out that the proceedings under Section 498A have been instituted only so as to create an excuse for transfer of proceedings to Shujalpur. In fact, proceedings under Section 13(1) were instituted in the month of August, 2024 and notice of which was duly served upon the applicant in the year of 2024 itself. Thereafter she on the advice of her counsel filed application under Section 498A. She submits that in fact, there is no problem in attending court proceedings at Indore as the applicant can always attend court proceedings through video conferencing. Thus, she prays for rejection of the application. In support of her submissions, she places reliance on the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by this Court in MCC No.2312/2025 (Smt. Deeksha Vs.

Bhanu).

6. Though, it is correct that initially the Hon'ble Apex Court considered that convenience of wife should be taken into consideration while considering the transfer of proceedings in matrimonial cases but, in the case of Anindita Das vs. Shrijit Das reported in (2006) 9 SCC 197, the Hon'ble Apex Court after taking into account flood of requests for transfer of proceedings on behalf of wife in para 3 to 5 has observed as under:- "3. Even otherwise, it must be seen that at one stage this Court was showing leniency to ladies. But since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by this Court. On an average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on board of each court on each admission day. It is, therefore, clear that leniency of this Court is being misused by the women.

4. This Court is now required to consider each petition on its merit. In this case the ground taken by the wife is that she has a small child and that there is nobody to keep her child. The child, in this case, is six years old and there are grandparents available to look after the child. The respondent is willing to pay all expenses for travel and stay of the petitioner and her companion for every v