IN TH 109 Paramjit K Akashdeep CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU 1. applicant- DMC/1492 by the resp Act, presen Court, Bat Kharar, Pun 2. marriage b female chil presently re Owing to separately s TA-662-2026 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Transfer Application No Date of decision :-15.05 mjit Kaur Versus shdeep Singh AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI Ms. Shruti Mandhotra, Advoca for the applicant. HI GUPTA J. (Oral) The present Transfer Applica -wife seeking transfer of Divo /1492/2025 titled as “Akashdeep Sing e respondent-husband under Section presently pending before the learne t, Bathinda, Punjab, to a Court of ar, Punjab. Learned counsel for the ap iage between the parties was solemniz le child was born out of the said wedl ntly residing in the care and custody g to matrimonial discord, the pa rately since 23/24.09.2025. 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH ion No.662 of 2026 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent E NIDHI GUPTA dvocate as Legal Aid Counsel pplication has been filed by the Divorce Petition bearing No. p Singh vs. Paramjit Kaur”, filed ection 13 of the Hindu Marriage learned Principal Judge, Family urt of competent jurisdiction at the applicant submits that the lemnized on 25.02.2012 and one d wedlock on 30.11.2012, who is stody of the respondent-husband. he parties have been residing VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. leave the harassment reliance ha 1), which r Learned co from the re Bathinda to 4. FIR or com alleged thre filed a co directions f 5. proceeding 6. the applica of travellin Court quer it was subm Learned co TA-662-2026 (O & M) It has been argued that the a the matrimonial home on accoun sment allegedly caused by the re nce has been placed upon the Medico hich reflects that the applicant had su ned counsel further submits that the a the respondent and, therefore, is unab inda to attend the proceedings pending On a specific query put by th or complaint had been lodged by th ed threats, learned counsel submitted a complaint before the competent ions for registration of an FIR against It has further been subm eedings between the parties are already (i) Petition under Section (ii) Complaint case agains and his family member (iii) Petition under Section Women from Domestic Learned counsel for the applic pplicant is unemployed and is, therefo avelling to Bathinda on each date o t query regarding the educational qua s submitted that the applicant is an ned counsel was unable to furnish any 2 the applicant was compelled to ccount of physical assault and the respondent. In this regard, edico Legal Report (Annexure P- had sustained four minor injuries. t the applicant apprehends threat is unable to travel from Kharar to ending before the Family Court. by this Court as to whether any by the applicant regarding the itted that the applicant has only petent Court at Kharar seeking gainst the respondent. submitted that the following lready pending at Kharar:- ection 125 Cr.P.C.; against the respondent-husband embers; and Section 12 of the Protection of mestic Violence Act. applicant has also contended that therefore, not financially capable date of hearing. However, on a al qualifications of the applicant, is an M.A. graduate in Punjabi. ish any specific reason as to why VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the applica employmen 7. is still wi However, o had institut Act seeking no such pet 8. considered 9. out of matr given due w mechanical and circum 10. residing wi employmen education a simultaneo responsibil 11. has been b incapable o attending t TA-662-2026 (O & M) applicant, despite being well-qualifie oyment. Learned counsel has further s ill willing to resume matrimonial ever, on being queried by the Court a instituted any proceedings under Sectio seeking restitution of conjugal rights, ch petition has been filed. I have heard learned counsel idered the material available on record It is true that while considerin f matrimonial disputes, the convenien due weightage. However, such princ anical manner and each case has to be ircumstances. In the present case, admitted ing with the respondent-husband, who oyment but is also single-handedly tak ation and day-to-day welfare of the ch ltaneously discharging parental nsibilities. In contrast, no exceptional o een brought on record by the applic able of travelling the distance betwee ding the proceedings. The distance 3 ualified, is not engaged in any rther submitted that the applicant onial life with the respondent. ourt as to whether the applicant Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage ights, it was fairly conceded that unsel for the applicant and have record. sidering transfer petitions arising venience of the wife is ordinarily principle cannot be applied in a s to be examined on its own facts mittedly, the minor daughter is d, who is not only maintaining his dly taking care of the upbringing, the child. Thus, the respondent is as well as professional onal or compelling circumstance applicant to establish that she is between Kharar and Bathinda for tance involved is approximately VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 230-240 ki of hearing, required on Family Cou 12. upon by t substantiate justify tran assertion re has been pl 13. cases of tra the wife. Hon’ble Su the wife. O 197 ‘Anind under simil transfer of also be m circumstan behalf of th Kaur Vs. S Manisha v 14. the presen TA-662-2026 (O & M) 240 kilometers and the travel time, as aring, is around three to four hours. M ired on a daily basis, but only on t ily Court. Even the Medico Legal Rep by the applicant, reflects only mi tantiate any such grave or extraordinar fy transfer of the proceedings. Sim ion regarding threat perception, no F een placed on record to support such a This Court is well aware of th of transfer emanating from matrimon However, in certain similar cas ’ble Supreme Court, as well as this C ife. One such case which may be re ‘Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das’ where r similar circumstances dismissed the fer of petition filed by the husband.Re be made to two cases of this mstances this Court had dismissed tra lf of the wife. These are: TA no. 126 r Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and TA N isha vs. Amarveer Yadav. Having regard to the overall present case, this Court does not f 4 me, as noticed during the course ours. Moreover, such travel is not y on the dates fixed before the l Report (Annexure P-1), relied ly minor bruises and does not rdinary circumstance which may s. Similarly, except for a bald , no FIR or substantive material such apprehension. e of the preponderance of law in trimonial disputes is in favour of lar cases as the present one, the this Court have refused relief to be referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court ed the wife’s application seeking and.Reference in this regard may this Court where, in similar sed transfer applications filed on o. 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias verall facts and circumstances of not find any sufficient ground VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document warranting proceeding 15. same is dis of. May 15, 20 Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo TA-662-2026 (O & M) anting exercise of discretionary juris eedings from Bathinda to Kharar. Consequently, finding no meri dismissed. Pending application(s), if any , 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 5 y jurisdiction for transfer of the o merit in the present petition, the if any, shall also stand disposed ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document