IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.230 CRM-M-1605-2022 (O&M)

Date of decision : 06.03.2025 PRIYA KOHLI ..... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. Dushyant Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Brijesh Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate and Mr. N.S.Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*****

KIRTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 407 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking transfer of the trial CHI-110-220 titled as “State Vs. Ramit Kohli and another” pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri in case FIR No.617 dated 26.10.2019 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 377, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar as well as the complaint bearing No.COMA/126/2019 titled as “Priya Kohli Vs. Ramit Kohli etc. filed under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 from the Court of learned JMIC, Jagadhari to the Courts of learned JMIC, Shahbad.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that marriage of petitioner was solemnized at Shahbad with the respondent No.2 on 10.10.2016 and she moved into her matrimonial home at Delhi. Out of this wedlock, a male child was born on 13.07.2017, who is currently in the care and custody of the petitioner. Respondent No.2 and his family allegedly used to harass and assault the petitioner due to which she started residing with her maternal uncle at Yamuna Nagar and presented a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar. However it is submitted that in the aforesaid complaint, she had specifically mentioned that her permanent parental address is of Shahbad. Further, even a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner before the learned Family Court, Jagadhri, which was, on application by the respondent No.2, returned by the learned Family Court, for filing before the Court having territorial jurisdiction. It has further been argued that the petitioner is now residing with her minor son at her parental home in Shahbad and it is difficult for her to attend trial at Yamuna Nagar, which is approximately at 45 kilometers distance from District Kurukshetra. He further submits that a complaint under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act bearing No.COMA/126/2019 is also pending before JMIC, Jagadhri.

3. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396 and Rajani Kishor PardeshiVs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, (2005) 12 SCC 237 to contend that while deciding the transfer applications, more weightage and consideration should be given to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another Court should ordinarily be allowed in order to avoid undue hardship to the female litigants.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the present petition has been filed only to harass respondent No.2.

5. The learned State counsel submits that he has no objection to the case being transferred as the same would not cause any prejudice to the parties.

6. Vide order dated 24.02.2025, parties were referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court for exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement, but the same was unsuccessful as per the report of the Mediator dated 03.03.2025.

7. Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

8. A two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dealt with power of the Court to transfer proceedings under Sections 24 and 25 of the Civil Procedure Code in Kulwinder Kaur @ Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh Vs. Kandi Friends Education Trust, AIR 2008 SC 1333, wherein it was held that the power to make such transfers is discretionary in nature