IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-32162 of 2009 Date of Decision : May 05, 2011 Simarjit Kaur ....Petitioner Versus Sukhjeet Singh Pamma .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.B.S.Gill, Advocate for the respondent. T.P.S. MANN, J. By a common order, the Court intends to dispose of the present petition, i.e. Criminal Misc. No. M-32162 of 2009, Transfer Application No. 413 of 2009 and Criminal Misc. No. M-31661 of 2010, as in all the petitions, the petitioner has prayed for transfer of the various cases pending between her on the one hand and the respondent on the other in respect of their matrimonial disputes. In the present petition, the petitioner has sought transfer of her own petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., against the respondent from the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hoshiarpur to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar on the ground that she is resident of village Ghelran, District Jalandhar and working at village Sanghwal, District Kapurthala. It is highly inconvenient for her to visit Hoshiarpur Crl. Misc. No. M-32162 of 2009 -2- for attending to her petition. In Transfer Application No. 413 of 2009, she has sought the transfer of the petition filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur. Similarly, in Criminal Misc. No. M-31661 of 2010, she has sought transfer of Criminal Complaint No. 73 dated 2.9.2009 titled Sukhjeet Singh Pamma Vs. Simarjit Kaur and others wherein she alongwith her mother Resham Kaur and brother Narinder Pal Singh has been summoned for the offences under Sections 495/420 read with Section 120-B IPC vide order dated 8.7.2011 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur. In Criminal Misc. No. M-31661 of 2010, aforementioned Resham Kumar and Narinder Pal Singh as well as one Ranvir Singh were impleaded as respondent Nos.2 to 4 respectively. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are duly represented by Mr. Amit Saini, Advocate. Respondent No.4 has not been served. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent No.4 has not been summoned as an accused in the aforementioned criminal complaint and, therefore, not required to be served for the disposal of the said petition. Learned counsel for respondent-Sukhjeet Singh Pamma has opposed all the three petitions filed by the petitioner on the ground that the divorce petition as well as the criminal complaint could only be instituted at Hoshiarpur and, therefore, these petitions cannot be transferred to Jalandhar. He has also submitted that it was the Crl. Misc. No. M-32162 of 2009 -3- petitioner, who herself opted to file the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Hoshiarpur although she had an option to file it at Jalandhar. He has also submitted that his client Sukhjeet Singh Pamma apprehends danger to his life at the hands of aforementioned Ranvir Singh, who is acting at the instance of Simarjit Kaur and her mother and brother in the event of three petitions being transferred from Hoshiarpur to Jalandhar. Aforementioned Ranvir Singh has not been summoned as an accused in the criminal complaint filed by Sukhjeet Singh Pamma against Simarjit Kaur and others. There is no material on the file if the order passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur in not summoning Ranvir Singh has been challenged by Sukhjeet Singh Pamma. Moreover, even if the stand taken by learned counsel for Sukhjeet Singh Pamma is accepted, aforementioned Ranvir Singh can cause harm to the respondent at Hoshiarpur also. He does not need the respondent to come to Jalandhar for launching an assault on him. In case the respondent has any apprehension of assault by aforementioned Ranvir Singh, he can have recourse to the law by approaching the concerned authorities. The petitioner is the resident of village Gehlran, District Jalandhar. She is stated to be presently residing at Sant Nagar, Jalandhar as she was forced to take up service at village Sanghwal in District Kapurthala to make her both ends meet. Apart from herself, she has to look after her minor daughter aged about 2½ years. Crl. Misc. No. M-32162 of 2009 -4- After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the three petitions and the replies filed thereto, the Court is of the considered view that it would be expedient for the ends of justice in case all the three litigations pending between the parties are transferred from Hoshiarpur to Jalandhar. Resultantly, the petitions are accepted and petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. titled as Simarjit Kaur Vs. Sukhjeet Singh Pamma, divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act titled Sukhjeet Singh Pamma Vs. Simarjit Kaur and criminal complaint titled Sukhjeet Singh Pamma Vs. Simarjit Kaur and others are transferred from the Courts at Hoshiarpur to the Courts of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. The proceedings in the divorce petition shall be dealt with by 1st Additional District Judge, Jalandhar whereas the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as well as criminal complaint under Sections 495/420 read with Section 120-B IPC shall be entrusted to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. The parties alongwith their counsel shall appear before the concerned Courts on May 31, 2011. ( T.P.S. MANN ) May 05, 2011 JUDGE ajay-1