- 1 - criappln1186.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 958 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1186 OF 2026 Bhagyashree Sangharatna Kasare ….Applicant VERSUS Sangharatna Lakshman Kasare & others …..Respondents Mr. M. D. Shinde, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for the State. Mr. S. G. Kawade, Advocate for Respondent Nos. to 5. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 28th AUGUST, 2026. PER COURT : 1. This application under Section 171 of BNSS seeks transfer of Sessions Case No.22/2025 from Sessions Court, Ambajogai, District Beed to any competent Court in Pune district. 2. Applicant/informant lodged First Information Report bearing No. 004/2024 dated 16.10.2024 with Chikhli Police Station, District Pimpri-Chinchwad. This First Information Report came to be transferred to Ambajogai (Rural) police station which came to be registered as Crime No. 308/2024. The said police station conducted investigation and filed charge-sheet before the competent Court at Ambajogai District Beed. - 2 - criappln1186.26.odt 3. Informant seeks transfer of this proceeding to the Court at Pune on the ground that the other proceedings filed by her under Domestic Violence Act and Section 144 of BNSS are pending with the competent Court at Pune. 4. Learned Counsel for Applicant submits that the Chikhli police station committed error by transferring the First Information Report to Ambajogai (Rural) police station. It is submitted that since the informant was residing then within the jurisdiction of Pimpri- Chinchwad Court, it was not open for the said police station to transfer investigation to Ambajogai (Rural) police station. In order to support his submissions, he placed reliance of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, AIR 2019 Supreme Court 1790, more particularly observations in paragraph No. 16 of the judgment. He further claims that the Applicant is a lady and she cannot prosecute the proceeding by staying at Pune. 5. Learned Counsel for contesting Respondent opposed the said contention by submitting that the cause of action for lodging First - 3 - criappln1186.26.odt Information Report occurred at Ambajogai and as such registration of crime at Ambajogai as well as investigation and filing of charge-sheet is in accordance with law. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rupali Devi (supra) has held that in case the wife desires to prefer the proceeding at the place where she resides after leaving matrimonial home, such Court also would have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in respect of offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. This does not mean that the proceeding from jurisdiction of appropriate Court should be transferred as per the desire of the informant. Needless to say that the informant is not prosecutrix of the said case and as such for the purpose of recording her evidence she would be required to remain present before the said Court. 7. Pertinently, the action of Chikhli police station in transferring the First Information Report to Ambajogai (Rural) police station was never taken exception to. Applicant permitted the investigation to be carried out by the said police station. Pursuant to the said investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed before the competent Court at Ambajogai. As such, there is no error committed in - 4 - criappln1186.26.odt investigating the said crime and taking cognizance of the same by the competent Court. Convenience of the parties cannot become a sole criteria for transfer of the proceeding. Needless to say that the Court should be slow in transferring the proceeding from the Court of competent jurisdiction. As this case being State case, it would be prosecuted by Public Prosecutor and not by Applicant. Even if the Applicant desires, she could assist prosecutor through her Advocate. This Court, therefore, does not find any special / extra ordinary circumstances to transfer the proceeding from the competent Court and as such there is no justification for transfer of the proceeding concerned. 8. As a result of above discussion, application stands dismissed. ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) dyb