SAJJAN MITRA MAJUMDAR vs SMT. SHREYA MITRA MAJUMDAR

1

CGHC010432262026 2026:CGHC:46895
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
TPCR No. 28 of 2026
• Sajjan Mitra Majumdar S/o Vibhash Mitra Majumdar Aged About 35 Years
Occupation - Software Engineer R/o Swapn Niwas J. B. G. Chaya Kabir
Chowk Tahsil And District Raigarh C.G.
... Petitioner
versus
Smt. Shreya Mitra Majumdar W/o Sajjan Mitra Majumdar Aged About 33
•
Years R/o Swapn Niwas J. B. G. Chaya Kabir Chowk Tahsil And District
Raigarh C.G. Current Address - Jarhabhata Om Nagar Bilaspur C.G.
... Respondent
(Cause title, as taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Ms. Astha Patel, Advocate.
For Respondent : --
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Order On Board
05/11/2026
1. Heard on admission.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant transfer petition under Section 447
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the
BNSS’), seeking transfer of Misc. Criminal Case No.868/2026, filed by
the respondent/wife and pending before the learned Principal Judge,

2
Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.), to the Court of the learned Family Court,
Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband would submit that the
marriage of the petitioner/husband was solemnized with the
respondent/wife on 25.02.2022. Out of their wedlock, they have been
blessed with a son. However, without any reason, the respondent/wife
left the company of the petitioner and started residing at Bilaspur with
her parents and minor son. She further submits that despite various
efforts made by the petitioner/husband to bring the respondent/wife
back, she did not return. It is further submitted that the
petitioner/husband has filed an application under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending consideration before the learned
Family Court, Raigarh, District Raigarh. Thereafter, the respondent/wife
filed an application under Section 144 of the BNSS, seeking
maintenance, before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Bilaspur (C.G.). Learned counsel further submits that the
petitioner/husband is a permanent resident of Raigarh and is working
there as a software engineer. He has to take leave repeatedly to attend
the hearings in Misc. Criminal Case No.868/2026, filed by the
respondent/wife and their minor son seeking maintenance before the
Family Court, Bilaspur. She further submits that the petitioner/husband
is ready to bear all reasonable travel expenses of the respondent/wife
for travelling from Bilaspur to Raigarh. Therefore, learned counsel
prays that the present petition be allowed and Misc. Criminal Case
No.868/2026 ( Smt. Shreya Mitra Majumdar and Another vs. Sajjan
Mitra Majumdar ), filed by the respondent/wife, be transferred from the

3
Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, to the
Family Court, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.).
4. During the course of submissions, learned counsel for the
petitioner/husband informed this Court that the distance between
Raigarh and Bilaspur is approximately 143 km and that there is direct
bus and train connectivity between the two places. The respondent/wife
is residing at Bilaspur with her parents along with her minor son, aged
about three years.
5. Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik
reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 held at para 9 which reads as
under:-
" 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.”
6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sumita Singh Versus Kumar
Sanjay and another reported in 2001 10 SCC 41 has observed that if
husband files suit against wife, then convenience of wife must be

4
looked into. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajani Kishor
Pardeshi Versus Kishore Babulal Pardeshi reported in (2005) 12
SCC 237 has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred
over the convenience of the husband.
7. In view of the aforesaid observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court and having regard to the fact that the respondent/wife is residing
at Bilaspur along with her minor son, aged about three years, this Court
is of the opinion that transferring the maintenance case from Bilaspur to
Raigarh would cause greater inconvenience to the respondent/wife.
Therefore, this Court is not inclined to allow the instant transfer petition.
Consequently, the present transfer petition is dismissed at the motion
stage .
8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No
order as to costs.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Rukhsar