High CourtsSingle Bench

Debadutta Behera And Others vs Itishree Behera

Orissa High Court · Decided on 31 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 OHC CK 0203

HON’BLE JUDGES
G. Satapathy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 407 · Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
TRPCRL No. 78 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 334 words

G. Satapathy, J

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2.

This is an application U/S 407 of the Cr.P.C. by the petitioners (husband and in-laws) seeking for transfer of the proceeding instituted by the O.P.-wife against them U/S 12 of the P.W.D.V. Act, 2005 titled as “Itishree Behera vs.Debadatta  Behera and others” pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C.(O), Bhubaneswar to the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur.

3.

In the course of hearing, Mr. S.K. Baral, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the O.P.-wife has instituted the aforesaid case only to harass the husband and her in-laws and the O.P.-wife has chosen to file different cases in different Courts with an ulterior motive to harass the husband and in-laws. On the aforesaid submissions, Mr. Baral prays for transfer of the aforesaid proceeding to the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur.

4.

On the other hand, Mr. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for O.P.-wife submits that the divorce proceeding between the parties in C.P. No. 11 of 2019 has already been disposed of by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur on 23.09.2023.

5.

In view of the aforesaid rival submissions and taking into consideration the present proceeding sought to be transferred being filed under P.W.D.V. Act, 2005 which provides for disposal of the case within a period of two months from the date of its first hearing and the availability of Video Conferencing facility to the general litigants in different Courts of Odisha, this Court does not find any justification to transfer the aforesaid proceeding by invoking the jurisdiction U/S 407 of Cr.P.C.

6.

In the result, the present transfer application stands dismissed, but in the circumstance there is no order as to costs. It is, however, open to the petitioners to apply for to the concerned Court in which the proceeding is pending and avail the virtual Court facility to take part in the further proceeding of the case.

7.

The interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

…………………………