1 2025:CGHC:59804 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPCR No. 36 of 2025 Smt. Priyanka Kerketta W/o Shri Ashish Tirkey Aged About 34 Years D/o Benedik Kerketta, R/o Nichepara, Ambikapur, Post Office Gandhi Nagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) At Present- Bemetatoli (Shantipara), Post Office Ginabahar, Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus Shri Ashish Tirkey S/o Shri Serafinus Tirkey Aged About 40 Years R/o Ramanujganj, Post And P.S Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kusum Lalchandani, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/12/2025 1. The present petition under Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”) seeks transfer of Misc. Criminal Case Unregistered/2025 from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Balrampur Place Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- 2 Ramanujganj to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Jashpur, District Jashpur. 2. Brief facts necessary for the case are that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent, and their marriage took place on 12/01/2022 at a church in Kunkuri, District Jashpur, after which she began residing at her matrimonial home. It is alleged that soon after marriage, the respondent and his family members started misbehaving with her and continuously subjected her to cruelty and harassment for dowry. The respondent, being a Government Doctor posted at Ramanujganj, District Balrampur–Ramanujganj, resided with the petitioner in his government quarter where they lived together as husband and wife. On 21/05/2022, the respondent allegedly abused and assaulted the petitioner and forcefully expelled her from the house during the night, demanding Rs. 20,00,000/- and a car as dowry, and threatening to remarry another woman if the demands were not fulfilled. The petitioner tried to continue living in the matrimonial home hoping for improvement, but the situation deteriorated further, and eventually the respondent deserted her, leaving her alone in the government quarter. She is currently residing at Kunkuri, District Jashpur, and finds it extremely difficult to travel to Balrampur–Ramanujganj to attend the court proceedings. She had earlier filed TPC No. 185/2025, which was withdrawn on 25/11/2025 with liberty to file a properly constituted petition since the earlier petition, though criminal in nature, had been filed as a civil case. 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently residing at Kunkuri, District Jashpur, while the maintenance case is pending before the Family Court, Balrampur– Ramanujganj. The distance between Kunkuri and Balrampur– Ramanujganj is approximately 250 km and there is no direct travel connectivity. Due to this long distance and lack of transport options, it is extremely difficult for the petitioner to attend the court proceedings regularly. She further submits that the petitioner belongs to a financially weak family and has no means to afford frequent travel expenses. Since the marriage was solemnized at Kunkuri, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jashpur, also has the territorial jurisdiction to try the matter. Therefore, it would be appropriate and convenient for the petitioner if the case is transferred to the court at Jashpur where she resides. She also submits that it is a settled legal position that the convenience of the wife is to be given preference while deciding transfer applications. Considering the facts that the balance of convenience clearly lies in favour of the petitioner, and hence the matter deserves to be transferred from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balrampur– Ramanujganj to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jashpur. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 5. Section 447 BNSS empowers this Court to transfer a case only when a fair and impartial trial cannot be had, a complex question of 4 law arises, or transfer is otherwise expedient in the interest of justice or for the general convenience of all parties and witnesses. 6. The petitioner has not demonstrated any apprehension of bias, prejudice, or legal difficulty in the Court at Balrampur-Ramanujganj. The plea of personal inconvenience in traveling 250 km does not meet the statutory requirements. It is settled law that mere convenience of one party is not sufficient ground for transfer of a criminal case (Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani, (1979) 4 SCC 167). 7. It is also relevant to observe that the petitioner has not produced any evidence to suggest that she is unable to appear through counsel, nor has she pointed out any incident or circumstance that would cause prejudice or hinder the fair conduct of the proceedings before the Court at Balrampur–Ramanujganj. 8. In view of the above, this Court finds no just or sufficient ground to transfer Misc. Criminal Case Unregistered/2025 from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Balrampur Place Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Jashpur, District Jashpur. 9. Accordingly, the Transfer Petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil