HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 705 of 2024 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. List has been revised. None appears on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2, 3, 4. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present Transfer Application has been filed with a prayer to transfer the Case No.1071 of 2024 (State vs. Vikas and others) in Case Crime No.520 of 2023, under sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354Kha, 324, 325 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Gajraula, District Amroha, pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge, (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate-4, District Amroha to the competent Court in the District Bijnor in the interest of justice during the pendency of the present case. 4. The present transfer application has been filed on the ground that the applicant is a weak lady and is financially poor and unable to purse her case, which is pending at District Amroha. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the distance between Bijnor where, the applicant is residing, is about 100 km and due to financial problems, she is unable to travel from Bijnor to Amroha. No other ground is pointed out by the applicant for seeking transfer of her case from Amroha to Bijnor. 6. On the other hand, the learned A.G.A. states that trial in the case, in question has already been commenced and three witnesses have been examined and submits that the distance from Amroha to Bijnor is only 100 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shivam Dubey Monika .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) km, which is not a substantial ground for transfer and any person can travel the said distance in the same day. 7. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the mere inconvenience is not the ground to transfer the case from one district to another district and moreover, the trial is at the advance stage and the victim and two other witnesses have already been examined, no purpose whatsoever would be served to transfer the trial from Amroha and Bijnor, as the witness has to be summoned afresh and process shall be initiated afresh. 8. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the applicant herself lodged the FIR at Amroha district, if that was so, it was open to the applicant to lodge the FIR at Bijnor, where the applicant is residing at present. It is further alleged that distance of 100 km is not the ground to transfer the case from one district to another and moreover rest of witnesses are located in Amroha district. 9. Having regard to the contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicant, this Court is un-understandable how a plea of inconvenience could be based to avoid traveling a distance of merely 100 kms and in this regard the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Talwar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors. [Alongwith Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 46 of 2012] decided on 02.03.2012 and in the case of Radheshyam Mangalchand Agrawal vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors in Criminal Writ Petition No. 589 of 2023 decided on 25.04.2024, has held that inconvenience could not be a valid basis for transfer of "criminal proceedings" from one Court to another. 10. In the totality of the facts and circumstances, no ground has been made out to transfer the case from Amroha to Bijnor. The transfer application is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. September 8, 2025 Monika TACR No. 705 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad