Latest Judgement

KEY PRINCIPLES AND RECENT TRENDS

1. STATUTORY FOUNDATION
Under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and under inherent writ jurisdiction, the Bombay High Court can transfer cases between courts when “ends of justice require” such action. In matrimonial and civil matters, this power ensures procedural fairness and reduces undue hardship.

2. CONVENIENCE OF THE WIFE AS PRIMARY CONSIDERATION
Bombay HC has repeatedly emphasized that, in matrimonial disputes, the wife’s convenience and potential hardship are paramount:

1. In Arundhati Devendra Pathak v. Devendra Niteen Phatak (Jan 2023), Justice Amit Borkar transferred proceedings from Pune to Panvel because the wife lived in Panvel, depended on her parents financially, and would face hardship traveling to Pune.
2. Similarly, in a case transferring divorce proceedings from Alibaug to Daund (Aug 2023), Justice Abhay Ahuja held that inconvenient travel could worsen the economically vulnerable wife’s position—even if it inconvenienced the husband and his mother.
3. Nagpur bench (Justice Ahuja, Nov 2022) likewise underscored that undue hardship to a non-working wife justifies a transfer under Section 24.

3. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF TRANSFER ORDERS
A transfer is not a matter of right but lies in the court’s discretion:
i. It must balance hardships on both sides and serve the cause of justice—extraordinary inconvenience alone does not suffice.
ii. A wife’s financial dependence and residence significantly tilt the balance in her favor.

4. LIMITATIONS
NOT BASED ON APPREHENDED BIAS ALONE
The Court rejects transfers based on mere suspicion or adverse outcomes:
i. In a commercial trust dispute, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh ruled that passing adverse orders is not sufficient for alleging bias—there must be a reasonable apprehension of           prejudice
ii. Similarly, a husband’s plea to move DV Act proceedings to align with divorce proceedings was accepted only when it served convenience and avoided conflicting findings, not due to bias.

5. TRANSFER IN CRIMINAL & QUASI-CRIMINAL CONTEXTS
Transfers are also granted in criminal matters where investigation or procedural fairness is compromised:
i. In Nagpur, Bombay HC shifted a hit‑and‑run investigation to CID, citing public confidence in the investigating agency.
ii. In Pune murder-attempt case, the Court intervened under its supervisory power when the local police investigation was inadequate, citing Supreme Court precedent (Amar Nath Chaubey).

6. GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUMMARIZED

7. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

i. COUNSEL ADVISED:
Highlight residence, financial dependence, childcare, or special needs when arguing for transfer.

ii. OPPOSING COUNSEL:
Should demonstrate comparable hardship to counter the plea.

iii. Harassment tactics, such as repeated change-of-venue motions, are frowned upon and may attract costs.

8. CONCLUSION
The Bombay High Court’s evolving jurisprudence reflects its commitment to substantive justice, prioritizing the vulnerable spouse’s circumstances and maintaining confidence in adjudication. Whether in matrimonial civil suit forums or criminal investigations, Section 24 transfers are tools courts wield thoughtfully, guided by fairness, necessity, and balance.

This article has been researched and written by Advocate Aarun Chanda, who practices divorce law in Mumbai and Pune. It is intended solely for academic purposes and should not be construed as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult a qualified lawyer or advocate specializing in divorce cases for professional legal guidance.

Seeking expert legal guidance?- Contact The Divorce Law Firm today.