2025:JHHC:17860 p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tr. Petition (C) No.33 of 2025 Minu Kumari, aged about 28 years, W/o Praveen Vishwakarma, D/o Sri Chhotu Sharma, resident of Village-Akdonikala, P.O.- Akdoni, P.S. Giridih (Sadar), District- Giridih. … Petitioner Versus Deepak Sharma, aged about 44 years, son of Charitra Prasad Sharma, resident of 129, Salanpur, Ranibazar, Katrasgarh, besides Post Office, Akashkanali, P.O.-Katras, P.S. Katrasgarh, District-Dhanbad. … Opposite Party Coram:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA For the Petitioner : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Adv. For the Opp. Party. : Ms. Suman Chatterjee, Adv. Order No.05/Dated- 4th July, 2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. In terms of order dated 20th June, 2025, learned counsel for the opposite party had prayed time to file counter-affidavit, but the same has not been filed. 3. Instant transfer petition has been preferred to for transfer of Original Suit No. 735 of 2024 from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Dhanbad to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Giridih. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the marriage of the petitioner with the opposite party was solemnized on 15.12.2023 at Narbada Mandir, Pachamba, District- Giridih, Jhakhand according to Hindu Rites and Customs. The petitioner and opposite party had been living together as wife and husband however, out of their wedlock, there is no child as the marriage was not conjugated. The opposite party (husband) always treated her badly by saying she 2025:JHHC:17860 p. 2 has brought only misfortune and misery to him and when the petitioner (wife) became pregnant, the opposite party (husband) refused to continue the conjugal life and also aborted six months pregnancy of the petitioner (wife). Due to such behaviour of the opposite party (husband), the parents of the petitioner (wife) went to Dhanbad for settlement of the dispute between the parties, but due to the adamant nature of the opposite party (husband), he refused to take care of the petitioner (wife) and also refused to continue conjugal life with the petitioner (wife). Thereafter, opposite party (husband) has filed a false case in the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad for declaring their marriage as null and void after six months of marriage. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that the case may be transferred from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad to the learned Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Giridih. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party (husband) has submitted that there is only 60 kilometers distance between the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad to the learned Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Giridih and the petitioner (wife) can easily approach to attend the proceeding of the court for declaring the marriage as nullity filed under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, there is no valid ground to entertain the transfer petition of the petitioner (wife) which is fit to be dismissed. 2025:JHHC:17860 p. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances and the submission made on behalf of the parties, I feel inclined, in the ends of justice, to allow the prayer for the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the proceeding of Original Matrimonial Suit No. 735 of 2024, pending before the Court of Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad is hereby transferred to the learned Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Giridih. 8. Accordingly, the present transfer petition is allowed. 9. Learned trial court, Giridih has to proceed with the trial of the case being Original Matrimonial Suit No. 735 of 2024 expeditiously in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournment(s) to any of the parties. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Amar/-