Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010070532024 2025:GAU-AS:585 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Tr.P.(Crl.)/32/2023 UTPAL JYOTI SUT S/O SRI DANDADHAR SUT R/O AMONI NO. 4 AMLOKI P.S. SAMAGURI DIST. NAGAON ASSAM VERSUS KEWELO U. KROME D/O LT. HESHU KROME R/O HOUSE NO. 15 (B) SEITHEKE BASA CHUMUKEDIMA NAGALAND PIN-797103 ------------ Advocate for : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ Advocate for : MR. S M ABDULLAH P appearing for KEWELO U. KROME Page No.# 2/8 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 21.01.2025 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel petitioner. Also heard Ms. F. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This application is filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for the transfer of Maintenance Case No.07/2023, from the Court of learned Family Court, Dimapur to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon or any other Competent Court in Assam, nearest to Dimapur, Nagaland. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that previously he worked in New Delhi at Effizert Pvt. Ltd., where he became acquainted with the respondent. Approximately four years ago, the respondent borrowed Rs. 1,00,000 from the petitioner, claiming it was for her mother’s treatment. Subsequently, she borrowed another Rs. 2,50,000/- on two separate occasions. By 2020, the respondent owed the petitioner a total of Rs. 3,50,000/-. Despite the petitioner lending the money in good faith, during the COVID-19 crisis, he urgently needed funds and requested repayment from the respondent. However, she expressed her inability to repay, citing her own financial difficulties. Instead of repaying, the respondent continued to ask for more money, and her demands turned into harassment. She frequently visited the petitioner’s workplace, causing embarrassment. As a result of the persistent pressure and financial strain, the petitioner moved to Assam in November 2020 and started working odd jobs while managing his family business. He continued requesting Page No.# 3/8 repayment but was refused. 4. In addition to the petitioner's contention, Mr. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that in October 2022, the petitioner gave the respondent an ultimatum to repay or face legal action. In response, the respondent filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, alleging that they had been in a live-in relationship, later engaged, and that the petitioner had fathered her child. This led to Domestic Violence Case No. 07/2022 in Dimapur, Nagaland. 5. Upon receiving the notice, the petitioner confronted the respondent but was threatened. He filed a complaint with Samaguri Police Station on 10.02.2023 but was told the police could not investigate the case since it occurred in Dimapur. On 28.02.2023, the petitioner learned of a conspiracy to abduct him upon his arrival in Dimapur, which he reported to the Samaguri Police. The petitioner feared for his life and filed a transfer petition seeking to move the case from Dimapur to a Court in Assam. This petition was registered as Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 09/2023, and proceeding was stayed by this Court on 27.04.2023. Despite the stay, the respondent filed another case under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., demanding monthly maintenance of Rs. 40,000. The case, Maintenance Case No. 07/2023, is pending before the learned Family Court in Dimapur. The petitioner, fearing for his safety, requested a transfer of the case to a court in Assam. 6. Mr. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, accordingly prays for the transfer of Maintenance Case No.07/2023, from the learned Family Court, Dimapur to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon or any other Competent Court in Assam, nearest to Dimapur, Nagaland, as the petitioner and his mother feel unsafe attending the trial in Dimapur. He further submitted that Page No.# 4/8 the petitioner is ready to bear all the traveling expenses of the respondent if his prayer is allowed. In addition to his submission, he also submitted that the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court has the authority to transfer the case, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Shah Newaz Khan and Ors. v. State of Nagaland and Ors., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 203. 7. Ms. Hussain, counsel for the respondent, submitted that both the petitioner and respondent are husband and wife, having married on 21.11.2021. She stated that she endured physical, mental, verbal, and financial abuse from the petitioner and his mother. In 2021, the petitioner began exploiting her financially, demanding more money to invest in his business. During this time, the respondent became pregnant, and the petitioner encouraged her to go to Nagaland for the delivery. After the baby’s birth, the petitioner ignored her and failed to provide financial support, even stopping her calls. The respondent further stated that she sold property in Nagaland to support the petitioner financially. In 2020, she invested Rs. 9,63,000/- in M/s Moitree Enterprises, owned by the petitioner’s mother, but has not received any return on the investment. Additionally, she paid Rs. 50,000/- on 21.02.2021 for a generator delivery, and in 2021, she took a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/-, which was credited to the petitioner’s account. The petitioner also used her HDFC credit card to buy an iPhone worth Rs. 69,900/-, leaving a balance of Rs. 57,100/-. The respondent has taken several loans on the petitioner’s behalf, leading to the blocking of all her credit cards and accounts. As a result, she is unable to apply for jobs. She cares for her ailing mother and child and has filed a maintenance case for support. The petitioner has remarried, and the respondent now lives with her son and mother in a rented house, selling CTC tea leaves to meet daily expenses. She faces significant financial hardship, making it difficult for her to Page No.# 5/8 travel outside Dimapur for the case proceedings due to the need to care for her child and old ailing mother. 8. In addition to her submission, she relied on the case decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Harita Sunil Parab vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and others, reported in (2018) 6 SCC 358, wherein it was observed that while exercising the power under this section, the court must be fully satisfied that an impartial trial is not possible. Equally important is the need to verify that the apprehension of not having a level playing field is based on credible materials and not just conjecture or surmise. Thus, she submits that the statements made in the instant petition are omnibus in nature, not based on credible materials, and the facts enumerated are insufficient to substantiate the allegations of threats made to the petitioner and his mother. 9. She further submitted that the petitioner has cited the case of Shah Nawaz Khan (supra), which deals with the interpretation of Sections 24 and 25 of the CPC in relation to interstate transfer of proceedings. The facts of the case do not arise from maintenance proceedings. In the case of Rajneesh v. Neha, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the remedy of maintenance is a measure of social justice as envisaged under the Constitution, to prevent wives and children from falling into destitution and vagrancy, as set forth in the Preamble and Articles 39 and 15(3) of the Constitution of India. Thus, she raised objections regarding the transfer of Maintenance Case No. 07/2023 from the learned Family Court, Dimapur, to any other court, citing financial hardship and the fact that there is no one to take care of her two-year-old son and her old ailing mother. 11. In this context, Mr. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner is the respondent in both the maintenance case Page No.# 6/8 and the Domestic Violence case, while his mother is also a respondent [D. V. Case]. Therefore, not only is the life of the petitioner at risk, but his mother's life is also in danger if they appear before the learned Court below in Dimapur. If they do not appear, the case may proceed ex-parte, in which event the respondent may not be benefitted. He further submitted that initially, when he received threats from the respondent's side, he approached the Samaguri Police Station. Although the case was not registered due to jurisdictional issues, a GD entry (GD No. 198 dated 10.02.2023) was made. Subsequently, he received further threats from the respondent's side, which led him to approach the Samaguri Police Station again. As a result, another GD entry (GD No. 547 dated 28.02.2023) was registered. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to bear all travel expenses if the case is transferred to a competent court nearest to Dimapur, such as the Bokajan or the Diphu Court, both of which are approximately 1 to 1.5 hours from Dimapur. However, at this stage, he and his mother are unable to appear before the learned Court below in Dimapur. 12. In response, Ms. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent, has submitted that there is no material to substantiate the threat allegations except for the two GD entries, which she claims are lodged with vague allegations intended to harass the respondent. She further submits that the respondent has a two-and-a-half-year-old child and she resides with her old, ailing mother. As such, she is not in a position to travel to the Court in Assam, leaving her minor child and mother behind. Accordingly, she raised an objection and submitted that it is not a suitable case to transfer the case from Dimapur to any other court, as prayer by the petitioner. 13. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, I have perused the case record and the annexures filed along with the petition. Page No.# 7/8 It is a fact that there were some monetary transactions between the parties. According to the respondent, there was also a husband-wife relationship between them. Both parties have made allegations and counter-allegations. However, it is evident that the petitioner approached the Samaguri Police Station on two occasions after receiving life-threatening threats from the respondent's side, and to substantiate his claims, the petitioner has provided copies of the two GD entries registered at the Samaguri Police Station. While these were denied by the respondent, and the respondent claims that the petitioner, in an attempt to harass the respondent, filed the petition for transfer and stated that, leaving her minor child and mother behind, she is not in a position to appear before any trial court in Assam. She also stated that she cannot bear the expenses of her travel. However, the petitioner has already stated in his petition, and the learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated before this Court, that the petitioner is willing to bear all the travel expenses that may be incurred by the respondent or her witnesses. 14. The plea of threatening cannot be outrightly rejected, as the petitioner has approached the Samaguri Police Station on two occasions, and two GD entries have been registered, it must be noted that the petitioner has requested the case be transferred to a court in Assam nearest to Dimapur and he is also ready to facilitate the travel expenses to the respondent for her appearance. Mr. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the case may be transferred to either the Bokajan Court or the Diphu Court, both of which are considered to be the nearest courts to Dimapur. 15. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account the view of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Shah Nawaz Khan (supra), I find it appropriate to transfer Maintenance Case No. 07/2023 Page No.# 8/8 from the learned Family Court, Dimapur, to the Court of the learned JMFC, Bokajan, Assam. Accordingly, the learned Family Court, Dimapur, is hereby directed to transfer the case records to the Court of the learned JMFC, Bokajan, with a direction for the parties to appear before the learned learned JMFC, Bokajan, on a date fixed by the concerned court. The learned JMFC, Bokajan, Assam, will fix a date after receiving the records of Maintenance Case No. 07/2023 from the Court of the learned Family Court, Dimapur. 16. In terms of above, this Transfer petition stands disposed of. 17. Sent a copy of this order to the respective learned Courts below. JUDGE Comparing Assistant