Court No. - 82
Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 451 of 2018 Applicant :- Manju Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vindeshwari Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Imran Mabood Khan,Rajiv Dwivedi,Shweta Pandey
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Shri Vindeshwari Prasad, learned counsel for applicant, Ms. Sweta Pandey, Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The application has been moved by applicant for transfer of Criminal Complaint Case no. 269 of 2013 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha/ J. P. Nagar, (Harish Yadav Vs. Smt Manju Yadav) under Section 494 I.P.C., Police Station - Amroha Dehat, District - Amroha / J.P. Nagar, from Sessions Division, Amroha/ J.P. Nagar, to the competent Court of Sessions Division, Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is legally wedded wife of opposite party no. 2, who has filed a criminal complaint case against her under Section 494 I.P.C. with false allegations; that she is living with Mausa of opposite party no. 2 as his wife; that there are matrimonial disputes between husband and wife and number of cases under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are pending between the parties; that opposite party no. 2 has also got lodged a false F.I.R. against applicant under Section 498(A), 323, 494, 504 and 506 I.P.C. through and in collusion with his Mausi in which he is one of the witness; that opposite party no. 2 is a practising advocate of Delhi; that applicant is living in Delhi and previously she was working in a private firm in Haryana, but due to matrimonial cases, her private job was finished; that applicant faces great difficulty in coming down to the Civil Court Amroha/ J.P. Nagar on each and every date and in case the trial of complaint case is transferred from J.P. Nagar to Ghazibad it will be a matter of great convenience for her while at the same time it will not inconvenient for opposite party no. 2 who is a practising Advocate of Delhi; that if the complaint case is not transferred then the applicant will not be able to contest the complaint case, due to influence of opposite party no. 2, an Advocate.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer for transfer of case and contended that opposite party no. 2 was practising as an Advocate at Delhi, but since long he is not practising and is living with her parents at Amroha and doing nothing for earning his livelihood; that if the case is transferred from Amroha to Gaziabad, it will be difficult for him to pursue his complaint case; that since the applicant is living as wife of Mausa of opposite party no. 2, cases have been filed by Mausi of opposite party no. 2 to which the applicant has no concern; that divorce petition filed by applicant at Tees Hazari Court, Delhi has been dismissed.
In reply the learned counsel for applicant contended that opposite party no. 2 is still practising in Delhi Courts and false allegations of leaving practice have been made in order to avoid payment of maintenance amount.
As far as the allegations and counter allegations with regard to relationship with applicant and Mausa of opposite party no. 2 is concerned, the matter is required to be decided by Court concerned at the time of disposal of complaint case and no comments are required by the Court.
Upon hearing parties counsel and perusal of record, I find that in view of likelihood of inconvenience to wife-applicant in coming down to J.P. Nagar from Delhi, for contesting complaint case under Section 494 I.P.C., there is sufficient ground if trial of complaint case is transferred from J.P. Nagar to Ghajizbad or any other district as per choice/consent of both parties.
At this stage, when parties counsel were asked as if they agree for some particular district, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that opposite party no. 2 will have greater difficulty in going Ghaziabad and the case may be transferred to Bijnaur or Gautam Budh Nagar on which the learned counsel for the applicant contends that Bijnaur will be too far from the residence of the applicant in Delhi and in case the complaint case is transferred from J.P. Nagar, Amroha to Gautam Budh Nagar in place of Ghazibad she has no objection.
In view of discussions made above, I find that application for transfer is liable to be allowed and is allowed accordingly with consent of parties.
The complaint case no. 269 of 2013, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha/J.P. Nagar, under Section 494 I.P.C. is transferred from the Court of A.C.J.M., Amroha/ J.P. Nagar, Sessions Division J.P. Nagar to the competent Court of Magistrate at Sessions Division, Gautam Budh Nagar for disposal in accordance with law.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
Let a copy of this order be sent to Sessions Judge, J.P. Nagar/Amroha and Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar immediately for ascertaining necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Sachin