1 2026:CGHC:2717 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 202 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Rathore S/o Kashiram Rathore Aged About 43 Years R/o Udaipur, Sarguja C.G. Posted As Tehsildar At Baikunthpur (District Koriya) Tehsil Office Ambikapur C.G. ... Petitioner versus Smt Sharda W/o Sanjay Kumar Rathore Aged About 43 Years R/o Sheetla Nagar, Near Santoshi Mandir Durg, Tehsil And District Durg C.G. ... Respondent (Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 16/01/2026 1. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking transfer of Case C.S. No.980/2025 (Smt. Sharda Vs. Sanjay Kumar Rathore), filed under Section 13(i-a) and (i-b) of Hindu Marriage act pending in the Court of learned Principle Judge Family Court Durg, C.G to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the the petitioner and the respondent were married on 14.11.2019 under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, before the Additional Collector and Marriage Officer, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. After the marriage, the Respondent stayed at the Petitioner’s ancestral home for about 15 days, after which she insisted on living separately. The petitioner AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.01.19 10:42:21 +0530 2 arranged separate residence at his place of duty. Within two months, the respondent began frequent quarrels, made unfounded allegations against the Petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the respondent’s conduct changed, and she began quarreling with the petitioner over trivial and unreasonable matters. She also developed suspicion regarding the petitioner’s female coworkers and frequently suspect him of having illicit relationships, leading to regular arguments and abuse. On 17.08.2025, in the petitioner’s absence, the respondent left the matrimonial home with her belongings and went to her parental home in Durg, and thereafter refused to return or communicate. He further submits that the petitioner/husband has filed an application under Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Ambikapur, however, respondent/wife has filed an application for divorce which is pending at Family Court, Durg. Moreover, the respondent/wife has also filed a transfer petition to transfer the case filed by the husband from Ambikapur to Durg. Learned counsel submits that the Petitioner is working as Tehsildar with the Government of Chhattisgarh and it won't be possible for him to travel to Durg to attend the proceedings. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no sufficient or cogent ground to warrant transfer of the case. It is evident that the marriage between the parties was solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and that 3 matrimonial proceedings initiated by both parties are presently pending before competent Family Courts. The petitioner has filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights at Family Court, Ambikapur, while the respondent has instituted divorce proceedings at Family Court, Durg and has sought transfer of the case pending at Ambikapur. Mere inconvenience pleaded by the petitioner on account of his official duties as a Tehsildar is not sufficient to warrant interference by this Court, particularly when both courts are within the State of Chhattisgarh and no exceptional or compelling circumstances have been demonstrated. This Court finds no justifiable ground to grant the relief sought by the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the transfer petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep