When Is the Wife’s Convenience Paramount in Matrimonial Case Transfers? Reaffirmation of Weightage to Female Litigants’ Rights in Transfer Applications

The Patna High Court reiterates that in matrimonial proceedings, the wife’s convenience carries significant weight in deciding transfer petitions, following Supreme Court precedents. This judgment upholds existing law, confirming binding guidance for all subordinate courts in matrimonial cases involving female petitioners facing hardship.

 

Summary

Category Data
Case Name MJC/2125/2023 of Swarnima Gupta @ Anita Gupta, Vs Barun Kumar Choudhary
CNR BRHC010719512023
Date of Registration 03-08-2023
Decision Date 31-10-2025
Disposal Nature ALLOWED
Judgment Author Mr. Justice Harish Kumar
Court Patna High Court
Precedent Value Binding on subordinate courts
Overrules / Affirms
  • Affirms Supreme Court precedents
  • Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay
  • Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi
Type of Law Matrimonial/Family Law
Questions of Law Whether the convenience of the wife should be preferred while deciding transfer of matrimonial proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi

The judgment holds that more weightage and consideration must be given to the convenience of the wife or female litigants when a petition is made for transfer of matrimonial proceedings.

The court cited Supreme Court precedents, highlighting that the woman’s need for accessible justice is paramount, especially when she faces financial constraints and considerable travel.

In the present case, the petitioner resided with aged parents, lacked financial support, and had to travel 375 km to attend hearings, justifying transfer.

The court emphasized the absence of any credible objection from the husband regarding hearings at the transferee court.

Judgments Relied Upon
  • Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr., (2001) 10 SCC 41
  • Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, (2005) 12 SCC 237
Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court Supreme Court decisions supporting priority to women’s convenience in matrimonial transfers; factual examination of financial and logistic hardship corroborated by pending cases in the wife’s jurisdiction.
Facts as Summarised by the Court

The petitioner married on 25.06.2018 and allegedly faced dowry demands and cruelty, leading to a complaint case and maintenance petition in Chapra.

The husband filed for divorce in Katihar. The wife sought transfer due to the hardship of traveling 375 km, residing with elderly parents, and absence of financial support.

The transfer was sought to consolidate related proceedings and mitigate hardship.

Practical Impact

Category Impact
Binding On All subordinate courts in Bihar and subordinate judiciary within the Patna High Court’s jurisdiction
Persuasive For Other High Courts in India, and the Supreme Court may consider for persuasive value
Follows
  • Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr. (2001) 10 SCC 41
  • Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi (2005) 12 SCC 237

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

  • Restates and applies the principle that the convenience of the wife is of paramount importance in matrimonial transfer petitions.
  • Confirms that hardship in terms of travel distance, financial incapacity, and lack of support are valid grounds for transfer.
  • Petitions supported by factual material of inconvenience are likely to be allowed unless credible opposing proof is shown.
  • Non-filing of counter affidavit or credible opposition by respondent may strengthen transfer plea.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

  • The court reviewed the facts showing that the petitioner, a woman, was compelled to travel approximately 375 km to attend divorce proceedings, lived with elderly parents, and received no financial support.
  • Citing Supreme Court judgments (Sumita Singh and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi), it reiterated that the wife’s convenience takes precedence in transfer petitions for matrimonial proceedings.
  • The absence of any credible challenge or genuine inconvenience demonstrated by the opposite party for attending the transferred court was specifically noted.
  • The court recognized that related criminal and maintenance cases were already pending in the wife’s local jurisdiction (Chapra).
  • Based on these factors and binding precedent, the case was transferred to avoid undue hardship to the petitioner.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner

  • Faces travel hardship of 375 km and lives with elderly parents.
  • Receives no financial assistance.
  • Related criminal and maintenance cases pending at Chapra.
  • Faces apprehension of untoward incidents at the hands of the opposite party.
  • Sought consolidation of proceedings for convenience and safety.

Respondent

  • Assertion that divorce proceedings were at the final stage, suggesting transfer would delay adjudication.
  • Alleged non-bonafide conduct by petitioner delaying proceedings.
  • Expressed willingness to have the case transferred to any neutral location, specifically not objecting to Chapra, if necessary.
  • No counter affidavit filed to contest factual assertions.

Factual Background

The petitioner married the respondent on 25.06.2018. She claims to have suffered cruelty and dowry demands, resulting in a criminal case and a maintenance proceeding, both filed in Chapra. The respondent/husband filed for divorce in Katihar. The petitioner, facing the dual hardship of traveling 375 km without financial support or family help, sought transfer of the matrimonial case to Chapra, where other related proceedings were also pending.

Statutory Analysis

The judgment dealt with the exercise of the High Court’s power to transfer matrimonial proceedings between family courts. The court interpreted applicable procedural law in light of Supreme Court guidance, affirming that the transfer power must prioritize the wife’s convenience in matrimonial disputes, especially where material hardship is established.

Alert Indicators

  • ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment affirms and applies established Supreme Court precedent prioritizing the convenience of the wife in matrimonial transfer petitions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.