Seema Kaushal vs Dheeraj Kumar

Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL)No.1621 OF 2022

SEEMA KAUSHAL Petitioner

VERSUS

DHEERAJ KUMAR Respondent

O R D E R

Pankaj Mithal, J.

1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the

pleadings.

2. The petitioner – wife has filed this petition for

the transfer of Divorce Petition bearing Application

No.646 of 2022 titled as “Dheeraj Kumar Vs. Seema

Kaushal” pending before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur

Metropolis Jaipur, Rajasthan to the Court of Principal Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by POOJA SHARMA Date: 2023.02.10 16:53:00 IST Reason: Judge, Family Court, Kurukshetra, Haryana. 2

3. The petitioner and the respondent – husband were

married on 13.11.2014 and their marriage was registered

before the Marriage Registrar, Ghaziabad, Uttar

Pradesh. They have a son, who is alleged to be living

with his maternal parents at Kurukshetra. The

petitioner and the respondent both are in Government

service and are posted at Jaipur. The petitioner is

currently posted as Deputy Director in National Health

Mission, Jaipur and a Class-I, Officer, in Rajasthan

Civil Services. She had remained posted in Rajasthan

since 2011.

4. The Transfer Petition has been preferred basically

on the ground that her father-in-law, who was Assistant

Superintendent of Police in Rajasthan, is a very

influential person in Jaipur and that at his behest,

threats have been extended to the petitioner, in respect

whereof, some complaints have been made by her to the

authorities. The son of the petitioner is living and

studying in Kurukshetra, Haryana, where he has initiated

proceedings for maintenance under Section 125 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the

respondents. Therefore, it is just and proper to

transfer the case to Haryana.

3

5. The father-in-law of the petitioner was the

Assistant Superintendent of Police but has now retired.

There is no allegation whatsoever in the petition that

he is so influential even today so as to influence the

decision of the Family Court at Jaipur. The extension of

some threats as alleged may be a danger to her personal

security but that may not be sufficient or a good ground

for the transfer of the petition. The complaints, if

any, alleging such threats are all subsequent to the

filing of the divorce petition and may be for creating a

ground for seeking transfer of the divorce petition.

Even the initiation of the proceedings by the son at

Kurukshetra in Haryana are subsequent to the filing of

the divorce petition and appears to be an afterthought.

6. The petitioner has nowhere alleged that she is not

going to stay in Jaipur any further or that she is

likely to be transferred or going to live in

Kurukshetra, Haryana. Therefore, when both the parties

to the marriage/divorce petition are residing in Jaipur,

it is not just and proper to transfer the case outside

Rajasthan to a remote place like Kurukshetra in Haryana.

It will not be inconvenient to both of them as, while on 4

duty they will have to go to attend the proceedings to

such a long distance and return.

7. In the overall facts and circumstances, we do not

deem it necessary to transfer this divorce application,

the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of accordingly.

…………………………………………………J. [V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN]

.…………………………………………….J. [PANKAJ MITHAL]

New Delhi;

10th February, 2023.