Jyoti Mishra v. Dhananjaya Mishra

Judgment

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Transfer Petition (Crl.) Nos. 94-95 of 2010. Anjani Kr. Mishra, Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Akshay K. Ghai, Sanjeev Bansal for the Petitioner. The following order of the Court was delivered ORDER

1We have heard counsel for the petitioner.

2No. one _appears forthe respondent despite service of notice. -3. The petitioner is the estranged wife of the respondent. While still living with him at Hyderabad, she had filed a written report before the· Station House Officer, P.S. Alwal, Secunderabad, that led to the institution of FIR No. 47012009 dated September 09, 2009 under Section 498-A of the Penal Code citing her husband Dhananjaya Mishra (the sole respondent) and five others as accused. The Police, after investigation,· submitted charge s.heet and the proceedings against the accused are now pending before the Vlth Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad in CC No. 804/20,09.

4In the meanwhile, the petitioner left her husband at Hyderabad and came to live with her parents at Indore. She has filed this petition for transferring the criminal case pending JYOTI MISHRA v. DHANANJAYA MISHRA before the Vlth Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad to a court of competent jurisdiction at Indore, Maahya Pradesh.

5The first. thing that needs to be noticed is that in the . Transfer Petitions only the hu-sbaod Dhananjaya Mishra is impleaded as~ respondent. ·The oth~r" accused ·in the criminll" 8 case are not made parties to these Transfer Petitions. The Transfer Petitions are, therefore, liaple to be dismissed on that score alone.

6Otherwise also, we are not inclined to transfer 'a criminal ·case from one State to another solely on the ground 'that it would be more convenient for the complainant (wife) to .prosecute the matter there. It is true that in cases of dissolution of marriage, restitution of conjugal rights or maintenance, tnis Court shows much indulgence to the wife and ordinarily transfers the case to a place where it would be more convenient for the wife to prosecute the proceedings.

7But a criminal case is on a somewhat different footing. The accused may not be able to attend the court proceedings· at lndo~e for many reasons, -9n~ 9f ~~!f~ may be 'financial.~ E' constraints, but the consequences of nor.-appearance .of the· accused before the Indore Court would be quite drastic. Having regard to the consequences of r:ion-appearance,of.th~.acqu~ed . in a criminal trial, we are loath to entertain the petitioner's -prayer - '• ..., -,.. r ,. v. for transfer, In a criminal proceeding, tne right of the accused to a fair trial and a proper opportunity tci defen'd himself car1not be ignored for the convenience of the complainant simply' because she Jiappens.to,be the estranged wife.

8For all, these reasons, we are not inclined to acceRt the prayer for transter in these_ca~es. · 1• · ., '. 1~ G . -9: The Tran.sfer Petitions are dismissed.-· . . '· ·~ - R.D: · -.- -- - Transfer. Petitions •dismissed: