Skip to content


Abhijit Vs. Dr. Smt. Aruna Tripathi - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
AppellantAbhijit
RespondentDr. Smt. Aruna Tripathi
Excerpt:
.....79 years.3. akhilesh, s/o ganeshdatt tripathi, aged about 51 years.4. sanjay dixit, s/o not known, aged 56 years.assistant general manager, state bank of india, vijay nagar jabalpur (applicants no.2 to 3 are r/o 318, professor colony, sapna sangeeta road, tower chowk, indore (m.p) versus respondent: dr. smt. aruna tripathi, w/o abhijit tripathi, aged about 29 years.r/o mohgaon project colony, civil lines mandla (m.p) ****************************************************************** for applicants : shri p.r.bhave, senior counsel with shri b.p yadav, advocate. for respondent : shri manish datt, senior counsel with shri ajay mishra, advocate. ****************************************************************** m.cr.c.no.1858 of 201.applicants:1. abhijit, s/o ganeshdatt tripathi, aged about.....
Judgment:

1 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR BEFORE : TARUN KUMAR KAUSHAL, J.

M.Cr.C.No.1857 OF 201.APPLICANTS:

1.

Abhijit, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 38 yeaRs.Assistant Manager, Adani Export Ltd., R/o 301, Princes Prides, 3rd Floor New Palasia, Indore, District- Indore (M.P) 2.

Ganeshdatt Tripathi, S/o Narayandatt Tripathi, age about 79 yeaRs.3.

Akhilesh, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 51 yeaRs.4.

Sanjay Dixit, S/o not known, aged 56 yeaRs.Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Vijay Nagar Jabalpur (Applicants No.2 to 3 are R/o 318, Professor Colony, Sapna Sangeeta Road, Tower Chowk, Indore (M.P) Versus RESPONDENT: Dr.

Smt.

Aruna Tripathi, W/o Abhijit Tripathi, aged about 29 yeaRs.R/o Mohgaon Project Colony, Civil Lines Mandla (M.P) ****************************************************************** For Applicants : Shri P.R.Bhave, Senior counsel with Shri B.P Yadav, Advocate.

For Respondent : Shri Manish Datt, Senior counsel with Shri Ajay Mishra, Advocate.

****************************************************************** M.Cr.C.No.1858 OF 201.APPLICANTS:

1.

Abhijit, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 38 yeaRs.Assistant Manager, Adani Export Ltd., 2 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11 R/o 301, Princes Prides, 3rd Floor New Palasia, Indore, District- Indore (M.P) 2.

Ganeshdatt Tripathi, S/o Narayandatt Tripathi, age about 79 yeaRs.3.

Akhilesh, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 51 yeaRs.4.

Smt.

Sushma Tripathi, W/o Shri Akhilesh Tripathi, aged about 46 yeaRs.5.

Smt.

Bhakti, W/o Shri Sanjay Dixit, aged about 55 yeaRs.R/o 23, C.I, Chuna Bhatti, Kolar Road, Bhopal (M.P).6.

Smt.

Mukti Shukla, W/o Shri Sanjay Shukla, aged about 57 yeaRs.7.

Sanjay Dixit, S/o not known, aged 56 yeaRs.Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Vijay Nagar Jabalpur (Applicants No.2, 3,4 and 6 are R/o 318, Professor Colony, Sapna Sangeeta Road, Tower Chowk, Indore (M.P) Versus RESPONDENT: Dr.

Smt.

Aruna Tripathi, W/o Abhijit Tripathi, aged about 29 yeaRs.R/o Mohgaon Project Colony, Civil Lines Mandla (M.P) ****************************************************************** For Applicants : Shri P.R.Bhave, Senior counsel with Shri B.P Yadav, Advocate.

For Respondent : Shri Manish Datt, Senior counsel with Shri Ajay Mishra, Advocate.

****************************************************************** 3 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11 M.Cr.C.No.1861 OF 201.APPLICANTS:

1.

Abhijit, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 38 yeaRs.Assistant Manager, Adani Export Ltd., R/o 301, Princes Prides, 3rd Floor New Palasia, Indore, District- Indore (M.P) 2.

Ganeshdatt Tripathi, S/o Narayandatt Tripathi, age about 79 yeaRs.3.

Akhilesh, S/o Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged about 51 yeaRs.4.

Smt.

Sushma Tripathi, W/o Shri Akhilesh Tripathi, aged about 46 yeaRs.5.

Smt.

Mukti Shukla, W/o Shri Sanjay Shukla, aged about 55 yeaRs.6.

Ku.

Anubhuthi Shukla, D/o Shri Sanjay Shukla, aged 24 years (actually 19 yeaRs.(Applicants No.2 to 6 are R/o 318, Professor Colony, Sapna Sangeeta Road, Tower Chowk, Indore (M.P) Versus RESPONDENT: Dr.

Smt.

Aruna Tripathi, W/o Abhijit Tripathi, aged about 29 yeaRs.R/o Mohgaon Project Colony, Civil Lines Mandla (M.P) ****************************************************************** For Applicants : Shri P.R.Bhave, Senior counsel with Shri B.P Yadav, Advocate.

For Respondent : Shri Manish Datt, Senior counsel with Shri Ajay Mishra, Advocate.

****************************************************************** 4 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11 Date of hearing:

12. 03/2013 Date of order : /03/2013 This order shall govern the disposal of aforesaid three M.Cr.Cs, in which common prayer has been made to transfer criminal cases from court of C.J.M, Mandla to court of C.J.M.Jabalpur on the ground of convenience of the parties.

On the basis of complaint made by respondent, trial of three cases is continuing in the Court of C.J.M, Mandla (1) MJ.No.10/2010 (Smt.

Aruna Tripathi versus Abhijeet Tripathi & otheRs.is case under section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, (2) Complaint Case No.662/2010 (Smt.

Aruna Tripathi versus Abhijeet Tripathi & otheRs.is case under section 498A IPC read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, and (3) Complaint Case No.1113/2010 (Smt.

Aruna Tripathi versus Abhijeet Tripathi & otheRs.under section 406 IPC read with Section 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.”

2. Transfer of aforesaid cases from court of Mandla to Jabalpur sought mainly on the ground that accused Ganeshdatt Tripathi, aged 79 years and lady Sushma Tripathi, aged 46 years are resident of Indore having no direct mode of communication to attend dates of hearing.

Accused Sanjay Dixit is a government servant working in Jabalpur itself.

Matrimonial matter under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act from Indore and under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act from Mandla have been transferred by this Court to the court of Family Judge, Jabalpur.”

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that ordinarily cases should be tried by the court having territorial jurisdiction.

For transferring a case from one court to another comparative inconvenience of the parties should be taken into consideration.

For complaint in all three cases, it would be difficult to proceed with her cases at Jabalpur.

Monitoring of cases and production of witnesses etc are the main considerations, whereas for accused 5 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11 persons, it is always open for them to seek personal exemption as and when need arises.”

4. On having careful comparative consideration regarding conveniences of the parties, in respect of trials of aforesaid cases, it seems not feasible and appropriate to transfer these cases from Mandla to Jabalpur.

Convenience to one party cannot be ensured at the cost of another.

No good ground is made out under section 407 Cr.P.C for transferring these cases.

Petitions are hereby dismissed.

(Tarun Kumar Kaushal) Judge tarun 6 M.Cr.C.No.1857/11, M.Cr.C No.1858/11, and M.Cr.C No.1861/11


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //