Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 96567 (ALL)

SAGAR MATYAGAYANDRA SINGH v. State of U.P. AND ANOTHER

TACR/561/2024 · 2025-05-05

Manoj Bajaj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72175 Court No. - 77 Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 561 of 2024 Applicant :- Sagar Matyagayandra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brahma Nand Singh,Vindhavasinee Prasad Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rahul Singh Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. By means of this application, the applicant is seeking transfer of Maintenance Petition No.255 of 2024 (Shefali Singh v. Sagar Matyagayandra Singh) filed under Section 125 CrPC from the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Surajpur, Gautam Budh Nagar to some other court of competent jurisdiction in district Allahabad. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant- husband has already filed an application under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act bearing Case No.204 of 2024, which is pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad. He further argued that only in order to harass the applicant, the opposite party no.2 has filed maintenance case at Gautam Budh Nagar, where her parents reside. Learned counsel has further submitted that opposite party no.2 is threatening him of dire consequences, if, the applicant attempted to resume the company between the couple. Therefore, he prays that the case be transferred to Allahabad. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. Upon hearing learned counsel for the applicant and considering his submissions, this Court does not find merit in the application as the ground of alleged threats extended by the wife are not supported with any material. The bald averments are not worth acceptance, particularly, when during the course of hearing, it is not disputed by learned counsel that the applicant is running a construction business in Mumbai. In this regard, he has referred to the petition filed by applicant under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, wherein it is pleaded that after marriage, the opposite party no.2 started residing with the applicant at Mumbai. Thus, considering the above background, this Court does not find any exceptional ground for transfer of the case. Resultantly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 P Kesari Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad