RASHMI RANJAN NAYAK vs BANAJA ROUT

Court
Odisha High Court



IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRPCRL No.44 of 2026
CNR No.ODHC010345222026


Rashmi Ranjan Nayak ….... Petitioner

-Versus-
Banaja Rout and another ....... Opposite Parties


Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mr. Abhijit Das,
Advocate

For Opposite Parties : Mr. Akansh Acharya,
Advocate


...................

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 29.10.2026
_____________________________________________________________
S.K. MISHRA, J.
1. This transfer petition has been filed by the Petitioner-
husband under Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 for transfer of proceeding in CRP No.190 of 2025
filed under Section 144 BNSS, 2023, pending in the Court of
learned Judge, Family Court, Kendrapada, to the Court of learned
Judge, Family Court, Cuttack on the grounds detailed therein.
Page 1 of 7

2. It would be apt to mention here that, before taking up
the matter for hearing, on the request of learned counsel for the
parties, the parties were sent for mediation, which failed as per the
report submitted by the learned Mediator vide his letter No.2584
dated 07.10.2026.
3. Hence, though no written objection has been filed till
date, opposing to the prayer for transfer, on consent of learned
Counsel for the parties, the transfer petition is taken up for
hearing and disposal at the stage of admission permitting the
learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties to have his oral objection
to the prayer for transfer.
4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
5. Reiterating the grounds urged in the transfer petition,
learned Counsel for the Petitioner-husband submits, there is a life
risk for the Petitioner, if he goes to Kendrapada to attend the Court
proceeding on each date, as the Opposite Party No.1-wife and her
henchmen may attack him. That apart, the Petitioner-husband is
working as a Supervisor at SGB Brand Safe Way Pvt. Ltd., under
TATA Steel, Meramandali, Dhenkanal. It would be difficult on his
part to attend the day-to-day proceeding before the leaned Judge,
Family Court, Kendrapada by seeking frequent leave from his
Employer.
Page 2 of 7

6. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties
submits, the Opposite Party No.1-wife is a deserted lady, having a
minor girl child, who is around 2 years old, is staying with her
parents at Kendrapada. That apart, she has no source of income to
maintain herself so also to meet the expenses of her minor girl
child and fully dependent on her parents. She has preferred CRP
No.190 of 2025 under Section 144 BNSS, 2023, before the learned
Judge, Family Court, Kendrapada seeking maintenance of
Rs.20,000/-
towards her so also her minor girl child’s
maintenance. In the said case, no order has been passed yet by
the learned Judge, Family Court, Kendrapada for maintenance.
That apart, being noticed in the said case, the Petitioner-husband
has appeared and contesting the said case at Kendrapada. She
being a destitute lady, having no source of income and having a
minor girl child, it would be difficult on her part to attend the day-
to-day Court proceeding at Cuttack, if the prayer for transfer is
allowed.
7. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties further
submits, as per the settled position of law, in transfer of
matrimonial cases, the paramount consideration would be the
wife’s convenience. That apart, as the Opposite Party No.1-wife is
at present residing at Village-Gobindpur, P.O.-Thauri, P.S-
Page 3 of 7

Mahakalpada, in the district of Kendrapada, in terms of Section
126(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which is akin to
Section 145(1)(b) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),
2023, she has rightly preferred application for maintenance before
the learned Judge, Family Court, Kendrapada. After the Opposite
Party No.1-wife preferred application under Section 144 BNSS,
2023 for maintenance before the learned Judge, Family Court,
Kendrapada, the Petitioner-husband has preferred an application
under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of
conjugal rights before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack
only to avoid payment of maintenance, so also to harsh her. That
apart, the Opposite Party No.1-wife has preferred TRP(C) No.121 of
2026, which is on board, for transfer of said proceeding from
Cuttack to Kendrapada.
8. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties further
submits, there is no life risk for the Petitioner-husband, as has
been falsely alleged. Had it been so, he would have lodged an FIR
to the said effect. Only to justify the prayer for transfer of
proceeding from Kendrapada to Cuttack, it has been falsely stated
so in the present transfer petition that there is a life threat to the
Petitioner, if he attends the Court proceeding at Kendrapada.
Learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties further submits, if the
Page 4 of 7

Petitioner has any difficulty to appear physically before the learned
Judge, Family Court, Kendrapada, he can very well pray before the
learned Court below to permit him to appear through virtual mode,
instead of putting the Opposite Parties into further difficulty
seeking a direction for transfer.
9. Law is well settled that, while dealing with transfer
petitions in matrimonial cases, convenience of the wife must be
looked at. In N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,
reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199, the Supreme Court held as
follows:
“ 9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under
Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends
of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal
or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever
Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer,
the Courts have to take into consideration the economic
soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the
spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of
life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the
circumstances of both the parties in eking out their
livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are
seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing
socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society,
generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must
be looked at while considering transfer .”

Page 5 of 7

(Emphasis supplied)

10. After going through the pleadings made in the transfer
petition so also taking note of the contentions made by learned
Counsel for the parties and the settled position of law, this Court
is not inclined to allow the prayer made in the transfer petition.
11. That apart, CRP No.190 of 2025 being a Section 144
BNSS, 2023 proceeding, the Petitioner, who is represented through
a lawyer, is not required to attend the day-to-day proceeding in
the said case. If the Petitioner intends to depose as a witness in
CRP No.190 of 2025, his presence may be required before the
Court below. Hence, it is made clear that on any date, if the
presence of the Petitioner is required before the Court below, but
he is unable to remain physically present, he may move
appropriate application before the Learned Judge, Family Court,
Kendrapada to permit him to appear through virtual mode.
12. Accordingly, the learned Judge, Family Court,
Kendrapada is requested to explore the facilities of Video
Conferencing available in the said Court and permit the parties to
appear before him through virtual mode following due procedure,
as prescribed under the “High Court of Orissa and District Courts
Use of Electronic Communication and Audio-Video Electronic
Page 6 of 7

Means Rules, 2025”, if so prayed by any of the parties. However,
on the dates of effective hearing, i.e., for examination and cross-
examination of witnesses and other purposes, for which their
presence may be required by the Court and if it is so ordered, they
shall remain physically present before the learned Judge, Family
Court, Kendrapada.
13. Both the parties are directed not to seek for
unnecessary adjournments and cooperate with the learned Judge,
Family Court, Kendrapada, who shall do well to conclude the
proceedings in CRP No.190 of 2025 at the earliest.
14. With the said observation and direction, the transfer
petition stands disposed of.
15. I.A. No.44 of 2026 also stands disposed of accordingly.
16. Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted on
proper application as per rules.

…….……………………
S.K. MISHRA, J.









Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
th
Dated, 29 October, 2026/ Kanhu
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: KANHU BEHERA
Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 30-Oct-2026 16:33:25
Page 7 of 7