Transfer Petition Before The Supreme Court Of India

A Transfer Petition is an important procedural remedy through which the Supreme Court of India ensures that justice is administered fairly and conveniently. The power to transfer proceedings from one court to another is exercised to prevent miscarriage of justice, avoid conflicting judgments, ensure impartiality, and reduce hardship to litigating parties.

In matrimonial disputes, transfer petitions have become one of the most frequently invoked remedies, especially where spouses reside in different States after separation.

The guiding principle is that transfer is not granted as a matter of routine. The Court must be satisfied that such transfer is necessary in the interest of justice. Every petition is examined on its own facts.

 Over the years, the Supreme Court has evolved certain settled principles while considering transfer petitions:

• Convenience of the parties.
• Financial and physical hardship.
• Safety and security concerns.
• Possibility of a fair trial.
• Interest of minor children.
• Avoidance of conflicting judgments.
• Overall interest of justice.

Statutory Framework:

1. Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: It empowers the Supreme Court, on the application of a party and after hearing the opposite side, to transfer any suit, appeal or proceeding from one High Court or civil court in one State to another High Court or civil court in another State whenever it is expedient for the ends of justice.
2. Section 446 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: In criminal matters, the Supreme Court may transfer cases or appeals from one High Court or criminal court to another where such transfer is necessary for ensuring a fair and impartial trial.
3. Article 139A of the Constitution: The Constitution also enables the Supreme Court to withdraw and transfer cases involving identical or substantial constitutional questions pending before different High Courts.

Transfer Petitions in Matrimonial Disputes

Earlier, the Court has leaned in favour of the convenience of the wife, particularly where she is unemployed, has custody of minor children, or lacks independent financial means. This approach flows from the recognition of the practical hardships faced by women in pursuing litigation at distant places.

However, recent decisions indicate a gradual shift towards a more balanced approach. With improved transportation facilities, availability of virtual hearings, and the increasing participation of women in professional employment, the Court now evaluates the inconvenience faced by both spouses rather than applying a rigid rule in favour of either party. Relevant considerations include:

• Distance between the two courts.
• Availability of video conferencing.
• Simultaneous criminal or maintenance proceedings.
• Health conditions of either spouse.
• Custody and welfare of children.
• Employment obligations of the parties.

Landmark Judicial Precedents

• In the case of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay & Ors.¹, in this case, the wife filed a transfer petition and sought transfer of a suit filed by the husband, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the convenience of the wife deserves greater consideration and allowed the transfer petition.

• In the case of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi², the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated that socio-economic realities affecting women must be considered while deciding transfer petitions and held that convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband.

Recent Developments:

• In the case of Niharika Meena Vs. Sanjay Dutt Meena³, the Hon’ble Supreme Court transferred a divorce proceeding from Cuttack to Jaipur because multiple connected matrimonial proceedings were already pending at Jaipur. The Court also directed the transferee Family Court to first explore the possibility of mediation before proceeding with the trial.
• In the case of Sheetal Gupta Vs. Vishal Gupta⁴, the Hon’ble Supreme Court transferred a restitution of conjugal rights petition from Chhattisgarh to Odisha after considering the convenience of the wife and the pendency of related proceedings at the transferee court. The Court further observed that the husband's virtual appearance may be permitted whenever appropriate.
• Conversely, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also refused transfer where no sufficient grounds are established. In the case of Siddhartha Mukherjee Vs. Jhuma Mukherjee Nee Nandi Rana⁵, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the request for transfer after finding no compelling reason warranting interference.

Recent decisions reveal certain noticeable developments:

• Greater emphasis on balancing the convenience of both spouses.
• Increasing reliance on video conferencing to reduce travel.
• Preference for consolidating connected matrimonial proceedings before one court.
• Encouragement of mediation at the earliest stage.
• Case-specific assessment rather than automatic transfer in favour of the wife.

These developments reflect the judiciary's attempt to harmonise procedural fairness with technological advancements and evolving social realities.

The jurisdiction relating to transfer petitions represents an important safeguard against procedural injustice. While earlier judicial practice largely favoured the convenience of the wife in matrimonial disputes, recent decisions demonstrate a nuanced and balanced approach that considers the circumstances of both parties. The increasing use of virtual hearings, consolidation of connected proceedings, and emphasis on mediation have transformed the manner in which transfer petitions are decided.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court continues to exercise its transfer jurisdiction cautiously, ensuring that the power is invoked only when required to advance the paramount objective of the legal system, the ends of justice.

By:

Ankush Mangal, Advocate

Email id: ankushmangal@vaishlaw.com

Mobile No. +91 7999673998

Footnotes

^{1  (2001) 10 SCC 41}

^{2 2005) 12 SCC 237}

^{3 Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 664 of 2024}

^{4 Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 268 of 2024}

^{5 Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 351 of 2025}

© 2026, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.