IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 17 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 77 OF 2026 Dr Shradda Rohit Gaikwad VERSUS Rohit Lahanu Gaikwad ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ade Ravindra Babusing Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Shitej Surve ... CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. Dated : September 29, 2026 ORAL ORDER : 1. The applicant-wife has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, which is registered as Hindu Marriage Petition No.459 of 2025. The respondent-husband has filed a petition for divorce before the learned Family Court at Aurangabad, which is registered as Hindu Marriage Petition No.A-570 of 2025. 2. The learned Advocate for the applicant-wife states that, in order to avoid any possibility of conflicting decisions, it is desirable that the restitution petition filed by her is also transferred to the Family Court so that the restitution petition can be heard and decided along with the divorce petition filed by the husband. The learned Advocate for the respondent-husband does not have any objection to the same. 3. In view of the aforesaid, it would be expedient that the Page 1 of 4 2026:BHC-AUG:44657 17 MCA 77-2026 restitution petition filed by the wife is transferred to the Family Court at Aurangabad. 4. The learned Advocate for the respondent-husband states that, apart from the restitution petition, the wife has also filed a proceeding under the Domestic Violence Act, being DVA No.279 of 2026, before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Aurangabad. The learned Advocate for the respondent submits that it would be expedient that the said domestic violence proceeding is also transferred to the Family Court so that all three proceedings can be decided simultaneously. The learned Advocate contends that adopting such a course would save valuable judicial time of the learned Courts as also of the parties to the litigation. 5. Learned Advocate for the applicant-wife, however, opposes the request. It is contended that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act are proceedings of a summary nature, which normally should be allowed to be decided by the Court of the Judicial Magistrate. The learned Advocate placed his reliance on following cases : (a) Mohammed Danish Abdul Wahab & Ors. vs. Farjana Mohammed Danish & Ors (Transfer Petition (s) Cri.No.522 / 2023, Dated 24/04/2024), (b) Srikant Shyamanand Chaturvedi vs. Dr. Roopali Chaturvedi (MCS No.423/2024, dated Page 2 of 4 17 MCA 77-2026 18/09/2025), (c) Anuraag Agrawal vs. Poonam Agrawal Nee Mukim, (MCA No.159/2023, dated 09/07/2024). 6. In reply, the learned Advocate for the respondent-husband places reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Vijay Suryakant Katkar Vs. Anuskha Vijay Katkar (MCA No.498 of 2022, Bombay Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, decided on 2nd February 2023) and Rohan Shah Vs. Nishi Viyang Shah (MCA No.477 of 2022, Bombay Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, decided on 28th December 2023). 7. The only contention that is pressed into service by the learned Advocate for the respondent-husband in seeking transfer of the Domestic Violence proceeding is that the same would save time and avoid the possibility of conflicting decisions between the parties. This contention has been dealt with by this Court in the case of Anurag Agarwal (supra). This Court has categorically held that the choice of forum should normally be left to the person who institutes the proceeding. It is further held that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act are proceedings of a summary nature and are designed to decide matters of moment. It is further held that merely because there is a possibility of conflict in decisions, the same cannot be a ground for transfer of every proceeding filed under the DV Act from Page 3 of 4 17 MCA 77-2026 the Court of the Judicial Magistrate to the Family Court. 8. In view of the aforesaid, in the considered opinion of this Court, the applicant-wife cannot be forced to prosecute the domestic violence proceedings before the Family Court contrary to her wish. The request for transfer of the DV proceeding is, therefore, rejected. 9. HMP No.459 of 2025 is transferred from the Civil Court, Aurangabad, to the Family Court, Aurangabad. 10. The learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, is requested to assign both the petitions, namely, HMP No.459 of 2025 and HMP No.A-570 of 2025, to the same learned Judge. The learned Judge to whom the cases are assigned is requested to consider consolidating both the cases and deciding them together. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) vj gawade/-. Page 4 of 4