Archana v. Naveen Kumar

Present: Mr. Nipun Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Nipun Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Nipun Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate for the respondent. Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate for the respondent. Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA, J. NIDHI GUPTA, J. wife is for transfer of the Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner-wife is for transfer of the Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage petition filed by the respondent Act, 1955 seeking divorce titled as “Naveen Kumar Vs. Archana” bearing case Act, 1955 seeking divorce titled as “Naveen Kumar Vs. Archana” bearing case Act, 1955 seeking divorce titled as “Naveen Kumar Vs. Archana” bearing case Act, 1955 seeking divorce titled as “Naveen Kumar Vs. Archana” bearing case No.HMA/106/2024 (Annexure P-1) pending before the Learned No.HMA/106/2024 (Annexure P Additional District 1) pending before the Learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh to the Court of competent jurisdiction Judge, Chandigarh District Courts at to the Court of competent jurisdiction District Courts at Bathinda.

2. submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the It is, husband under Section 13 of the mentioned petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the mentioned petition filed by the respondent above-mentioned petition filed by the respondent Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA’) deserves to be transferred Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA’) deserves to be transferred Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA’) deserves to be transferred Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA’) deserves to be transferred from learned Additional District Judg Additional District Judge, Chandigarh to the Court of competent e, Chandigarh to the Court of competent jurisdiction District Courts at Bathinda District Courts at Bathinda on account of following reasons that: on account of following reasons that:- i) the petitioner was married to the respondent on 04.02.2014; the petitioner was married to the respondent on 04.02.2014; ii) no child is born out of this wedlock; no child is born out of this wedlock; TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.22 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2024 (O&M) TA-1384-2024 (O&M) -2- d, the parties are living separately iii) due to matrimonial discord, the parties are living separately d, the parties are living separately iii) since April 2016; since April 2016; iv) application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C is application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C is application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C is pending at Bathinda; pending at Bathinda; v) the petitioner is residing at the mercy of her widow mother and the petitioner is residing at the mercy of her widow mother and the petitioner is residing at the mercy of her widow mother and 250 kms on one side from is therefore unable to travel the distance of 250 kms on one side from is therefore unable to travel the distance of is therefore unable to travel the distance of Bathinda to Chandigarh; Bathinda to Chandigarh; vi) the petitioner is not working and, therefore, has financial the petitioner is not working and, therefore, has financial the petitioner is not working and, therefore, has financial constraints which do not permit her to travel to Chandigarh. constraints which do not permit her to travel to Chandigarh. constraints which do not permit her to travel to Chandigarh. said petition under Section 13 It is accordingly, prayed that the above-said petition under Section 13 It is accordingly, prayed that the above It is accordingly, prayed that the above transferred from Chandigarh to Bathinda. HMA be transferred from Chandigarh to Bathinda. transferred from Chandigarh to Bathinda.

3. husband vehemently opposes Per contra, ld counsel for the respondent-husband vehemently opposes Per contra, ld counsel for the respondent Per contra, ld counsel for the respondent submissions of the petitioner and submits that present petition has been filed by the submissions of the petitioner and submits that present petition has been filed by the submissions of the petitioner and submits that present petition has been filed by the submissions of the petitioner and submits that present petition has been filed by the raws the attention of this petitioner only to harass the respondent. Ld. Counsel draws the attention of this petitioner only to harass the respondent. Ld. Counsel d petitioner only to harass the respondent. Ld. Counsel d Court to an order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the predecessor Bench of this Court Court to an order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the predecessor Bench of this Court Court to an order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the predecessor Bench of this Court Court to an order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the predecessor Bench of this Court directing the petitioner to file an affidavit with regard to her place of residence at directing the petitioner to file an affidavit with regard to her place of residence at directing the petitioner to file an affidavit with regard to her place of residence at directing the petitioner to file an affidavit with regard to her place of residence at the petitioner had filed Mathura. It is submitted that this was so because previously the petitioner had filed Mathura. It is submitted that this was so because previously Mathura. It is submitted that this was so because previously three cases, the same being a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C; an FIR No.85 of three cases, the same being a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C; an FIR No.85 of three cases, the same being a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C; an FIR No.85 of three cases, the same being a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C; an FIR No.85 of 2014; and a petitioner under Section 12 of the DV Act at Mathura, despite the fact 2014; and a petitioner under Section 12 of the DV Act at Mathura, despite the fact 2014; and a petitioner under Section 12 of the DV Act at Mathura, despite the fact 2014; and a petitioner under Section 12 of the DV Act at Mathura, despite the fact hat the said that the petitioner had never resided in Mathura. It is submitted that the said that the petitioner had never resided in Mathura. It is submitted t that the petitioner had never resided in Mathura. It is submitted t proceedings were filed by the petitioner at Mathura only to harass the respondent proceedings were filed by the petitioner at Mathura only to harass the respondent proceedings were filed by the petitioner at Mathura only to harass the respondent proceedings were filed by the petitioner at Mathura only to harass the respondent and also because maternal uncle of the petitioner is SSP at Mathura. Keeping in and also because maternal uncle of the petitioner is SSP at Mathura. Keeping in and also because maternal uncle of the petitioner is SSP at Mathura. Keeping in and also because maternal uncle of the petitioner is SSP at Mathura. Keeping in view the above facts, predecessor Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 view the above facts, predecessor Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 view the above facts, predecessor Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 view the above facts, predecessor Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 had directed the petitioner to file an affidavit in respect of her place of residence. had directed the petitioner to file an affidavit in respect of her place of residence. had directed the petitioner to file an affidavit in respect of her place of residence. had directed the petitioner to file an affidavit in respect of her place of residence. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.22 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2024 (O&M) TA-1384-2024 (O&M) -3- In pursuance to which petitioner had filed affidavit in which she had admitted that In pursuance to which petitioner had filed affidavit in which she had admitted that In pursuance to which petitioner had filed affidavit in which she had admitted that In pursuance to which petitioner had filed affidavit in which she had admitted that she had never resided at Mathura. she had never resided at Mathura.

4. out that the respondent Ld. Counsel for the respondent further points out that the respondent Ld. Counsel for the respondent further points Ld. Counsel for the respondent further points had previously filed petition under Section 13 of HMA at Jaipur. Petitioner herself had previously filed petition under Section 13 of HMA at Jaipur. Petitioner herself had previously filed petition under Section 13 of HMA at Jaipur. Petitioner herself had previously filed petition under Section 13 of HMA at Jaipur. Petitioner herself had filed quashing petition before the Allahabad High Court. It is contended that had filed quashing petition before the Allahabad High Court. It is contended that had filed quashing petition before the Allahabad High Court. It is contended that had filed quashing petition before the Allahabad High Court. It is contended that vel is without merit. therefore, contention of the petitioner that she is unable to travel is without merit. therefore, contention of the petitioner that she is unable to tra therefore, contention of the petitioner that she is unable to tra

5. It is further pointed out that the petitioner is a qualified M.Sc in It is further pointed out that the petitioner is a qualified M.Sc in It is further pointed out that the petitioner is a qualified M.Sc in It is further pointed out that the petitioner is a qualified M.Sc in biology and is also a B.Ed Teacher, however, she has chosen not to work Micro-biology and is also a B.Ed Teacher, however, she has chosen not to work biology and is also a B.Ed Teacher, however, she has chosen not to work biology and is also a B.Ed Teacher, however, she has chosen not to work and therefore, her submission that she has financial constraints are of her own and therefore, her submission that she has financial constraints are of her own and therefore, her submission that she has financial constraints are of her own and therefore, her submission that she has financial constraints are of her own making.

6. It is lastly pointed out that at present there is no case pending at It is lastly pointed out that at present there is no case pending at It is lastly pointed out that at present there is no case pending at It is lastly pointed out that at present there is no case pending at Bathinda as the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C already Bathinda as the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C already Bathinda as the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C already Bathinda as the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C already stands decided by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda. It is accordingly stands decided by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda. It is accordingly stands decided by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda. It is accordingly stands decided by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda. It is accordingly at the present petition deserves to be dismissed. prayed that the present petition deserves to be dismissed. at the present petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. No other argument is raised by behalf of learned counsel for the No other argument is raised by behalf of learned counsel for the No other argument is raised by behalf of learned counsel for the No other argument is raised by behalf of learned counsel for the parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner. merit in the submissions made on behalf of the pet merit in the submissions made on behalf of the pet

8. No doubt the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating No doubt the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating No doubt the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating No doubt the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating to the effect that convenience from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife - to the effect that convenience from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife of the wife is to be given precedence over the convenience of the Husband. of the wife is to be given precedence over the convenience of the Husband. of the wife is to be given precedence over the convenience of the Husband. of the wife is to be given precedence over the convenience of the Husband. sent case it would appear that the petitioner has filed the However, in the present case it would appear that the petitioner has filed the sent case it would appear that the petitioner has filed the However, in the pre present case only to harass the respondent. The petitioner does not deny that present case only to harass the respondent. The petitioner does not deny that present case only to harass the respondent. The petitioner does not deny that present case only to harass the respondent. The petitioner does not deny that previously cases were filed by her at Mathura and before the Allahabad High previously cases were filed by her at Mathura and before the Allahabad High previously cases were filed by her at Mathura and before the Allahabad High previously cases were filed by her at Mathura and before the Allahabad High drawn the attention of this Court to the Court. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the drawn the attention of this Court to the Court. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.22 09:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2024 (O&M) TA-1384-2024 (O&M) -4- affidavit filed by the petitioner in pursuance to order dated 07.03.2025 to submit affidavit filed by the petitioner in pursuance to order dated 07.03.2025 to submit affidavit filed by the petitioner in pursuance to order dated 07.03.2025 to submit affidavit filed by the petitioner in pursuance to order dated 07.03.2025 to submit that the petitioner was constrained to stay at the house of her maternal uncle at that the petitioner was constrained to stay at the house of her maternal uncle at that the petitioner was constrained to stay at the house of her maternal uncle at that the petitioner was constrained to stay at the house of her maternal uncle at oner there. Thus, Petitioner has Mathura, as the respondent had deserted the petitioner there. Thus, Petitioner has Mathura, as the respondent had deserted the petiti Mathura, as the respondent had deserted the petiti not denied that she has been undertaking the travel of more than 500 km from not denied that she has been undertaking the travel of more than 500 km from not denied that she has been undertaking the travel of more than 500 km from not denied that she has been undertaking the travel of more than 500 km from Bathinda to Mathura and Bathinda to Allahabad to pursue the cases filed by her at Bathinda to Mathura and Bathinda to Allahabad to pursue the cases filed by her at Bathinda to Mathura and Bathinda to Allahabad to pursue the cases filed by her at Bathinda to Mathura and Bathinda to Allahabad to pursue the cases filed by her at t reason as to why the said places. As such, petitioner is unable to give any cogent reason as to why the said places. As such, petitioner is unable to give any cogen the said places. As such, petitioner is unable to give any cogen she is unable to travel the comparatively shorter distance of about 250 km from she is unable to travel the comparatively shorter distance of about 250 km from she is unable to travel the comparatively shorter distance of about 250 km from she is unable to travel the comparatively shorter distance of about 250 km from Bathinda to Chandigarh. Bathinda to Chandigarh.

9. Further, admittedly, petitioner does not have any filial responsibility. Further, admittedly, petitioner does not have any filial responsibility. Further, admittedly, petitioner does not have any filial responsibility. Further, admittedly, petitioner does not have any filial responsibility. ent petition that she is highly Moreover, petitioner has failed to disclose in the present petition that she is highly Moreover, petitioner has failed to disclose in the pres Moreover, petitioner has failed to disclose in the pres qualified. Petitioner has also failed to mention that the proceeding under section qualified. Petitioner has also failed to mention that the proceeding under section qualified. Petitioner has also failed to mention that the proceeding under section qualified. Petitioner has also failed to mention that the proceeding under section 125 CRPC stands concluded. 125 CRPC stands concluded.

10. This Court is also well aware that the preponderance of law in cases This Court is also well aware that the preponderance of law in cases This Court is also well aware that the preponderance of law in cases This Court is also well aware that the preponderance of law in cases disputes is in favour of the wife. However, of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. However, disputes is in favour of the wife. However, of transfer emanating from matrimonial in certain cases similar to the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as in certain cases similar to the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as in certain cases similar to the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as in certain cases similar to the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as