T.A.No.249 of 2011 (O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No.249 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 9.5.2013 Vikas Bedi .............Petitioner v. Megha Bedi .............Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Ms. Seema Pascricha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Hundal, Advocate for the respondent. Jaswant Singh,J(Oral). Petitioner-husband is seeking the transfer of proceedings under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 initiated by the wife at Bathinda to a court outside the District. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 10.10.2010 at Karnal although the parental home of the wife is at Bathinda. After marriage, the couple cohabited as husband and wife at Karnal and on 7.7.2011, a son was born out of this wedlock. Due to matrimonial dispute, the wife is stated to be residing separately at parental home at Bathinda since 16.4.2012 along with the minor son. It is further stated that at Bathinda the wife has initiated three proceedings namely (i) petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C (ii) Petition under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act and (iii) FIR under Sections 406/498- A IPC. On the other hand, petitioner-husband is stated to have filed T.A.No.249 of 2011 (O&M) #2# a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Prayer in the present case is for shifting of the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act initiated by the wife from Bathinda to any other court on the ground that the family members of the wife are threatening the petitioner-husband during his appearance in the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act at Bathinda. In support, learned counsel has also annexed an application dated 1.5.2012 (P.3) made to the Incharge, Police Post, Bathinda. It is, thus, submitted that the proceedings be transferred out due to the apprehension of threat to the life of the petitioner. Written reply on behalf of the respondent-wife has also been filed. The execution of threat to the husband by family members of the wife has been categorically and specifically denied. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no ground to entertain the prayer for transferring the aforesaid proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act from Bathinda only in view of the alleged complaint (P.3). It cannot be disputed that if the police had failed to take action, the husband was free to file a criminal complaint against the family members of the wife but nothing of the sort was done. Needless to say that any conduct on behalf of any person, which amounts to committing of an offence, the authorities concerned are presumed to perform their duty. Dismissed. May 09, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE