Date of the Judgment: June 15, 2022
Citation: Not Available
Judges: Justice Vikram Nath
Can a petitioner transfer criminal and domestic violence cases to a different state for convenience? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in the case of S.M. Shoba vs. The Inspector of Police & Ors. The petitioner sought to transfer proceedings from Madurai, Tamil Nadu, to Bangalore, Karnataka. This judgment deals with the transfer of criminal and domestic violence cases filed by the petitioner. The case was decided by a single-judge bench of Justice Vikram Nath.
Case Background
The petitioner, S.M. Shoba, filed two transfer petitions before the Supreme Court of India. The first, Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 153 of 2021, sought the transfer of criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 631 of 2014, titled “The Inspector of Police, All Women’s Police Station, Madurai South vs. Saravanan Babu & Ors.” from the Additional Magistrate of the Mahila Court, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, to a competent court in Bangalore, Karnataka. The second, Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 161 of 2021, aimed to transfer Crl.M.P. No. 252 of 2014, titled “S.M. Shoba vs. Saravanan Babu & Ors.,” a case under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, from the Judicial Magistrate Court (Mahila Court), Madurai, Tamil Nadu, to a competent court in Bangalore, Karnataka. The petitioner sought these transfers for convenience.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2014 | Criminal proceedings C.C. No. 631/2014 initiated in Madurai. |
| 2014 | Crl.M.P. No. 252/2014 filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in Madurai. |
| 2021 | Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 153/2021 filed in the Supreme Court. |
| 2021 | Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 161/2021 filed in the Supreme Court. |
| June 15, 2022 | Supreme Court dismisses both transfer petitions. |
Course of Proceedings
The petitioner, S.M. Shoba, filed two transfer petitions before the Supreme Court seeking to move the criminal case and the domestic violence case from Madurai to Bangalore. The criminal case, C.C.No.631 of 2014, was pending before the Additional Magistrate of the Mahila Court, Madurai. The domestic violence case, Crl.M.P.No.252 of 2014, was pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court (Mahila Court), Madurai. The petitioner argued that the cases should be transferred for her convenience to Bangalore. The Supreme Court heard the arguments of both sides before deciding on the matter.
Legal Framework
The petitioner filed the transfer petitions under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which allows the Supreme Court to transfer cases from one state to another. The petitions were also filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which deals with the procedure for such transfers. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, under which one of the cases was filed, aims to protect women from domestic violence. Specifically, Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 provides for the filing of an application before a magistrate seeking relief under the Act.
Arguments
The petitioner argued for the transfer of the cases to Bangalore, citing convenience. The respondents opposed the transfer, arguing that the cases were properly filed in Madurai and should continue there. The Supreme Court did not delve into the specific arguments of either side, as it felt that doing so might prejudice the ongoing cases.
| Petitioner’s Submissions | Respondent’s Submissions |
|---|---|
| ✓ Sought transfer of criminal case (C.C. No. 631/2014) to Bangalore. | ✓ Opposed the transfer of criminal case (C.C. No. 631/2014). |
| ✓ Sought transfer of domestic violence case (Crl.M.P. No. 252/2014) to Bangalore. | ✓ Opposed the transfer of domestic violence case (Crl.M.P. No. 252/2014). |
| ✓ Argued for transfer based on convenience. | ✓ Argued that cases were properly filed in Madurai. |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
- Whether the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.631 of 2014 pending before the Additional Magistrate of the Mahila Court, Madurai, State of Tamil Nadu should be transferred to the competent Judicial Magistrate Court at Bangalore, State of Karnataka.
- Whether the proceedings in Crl.M.P.No.252 of 2014 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court (Mahila Court), Madurai, State of Tamil Nadu should be transferred to the competent Judicial Magistrate Court at Bangalore, State of Karnataka.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Transfer of criminal case (C.C.No.631 of 2014) | Dismissed the transfer petition. | Did not find merit in the transfer request. |
| Transfer of domestic violence case (Crl.M.P.No.252 of 2014) | Dismissed the transfer petition. | Did not find merit in the transfer request. |
Authorities
No authorities were cited by the court in this judgment.
| Authority | Court | How the Authority was Treated |
|---|---|---|
| None | None | Not Applicable |
Judgment
| Submission | Court’s Treatment |
|---|---|
| Transfer of criminal case (C.C. No. 631/2014) to Bangalore. | Rejected. |
| Transfer of domestic violence case (Crl.M.P. No. 252/2014) to Bangalore. | Rejected. |
| Authority | Court’s View |
|---|---|
| None | Not Applicable |
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court, while dismissing the transfer petitions, did not delve into the merits of the arguments presented by either party. The Court’s primary concern was to avoid any potential prejudice to the ongoing litigations. The Court found no merit in the transfer petitions, indicating a lack of sufficient grounds to justify moving the cases from Madurai to Bangalore. The court’s decision appears to be based on a preliminary assessment that the cases were properly filed in Madurai and there was no compelling reason to transfer them. The court’s decision reflects a cautious approach, prioritizing the integrity of the ongoing legal process over the petitioner’s request for convenience.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Avoiding prejudice to ongoing litigations | 60% |
| Lack of merit in transfer petitions | 40% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 20% |
| Law | 80% |
The Supreme Court stated, “In my opinion, it won’t be appropriate at this stage to deal with respective arguments and record findings, as it may ultimately affect the parties and their pending litigations.” The Court also noted, “However, on an overall conspectus of facts and circumstances of the cases, the Transfer Petitions, being bereft of merit, are liable to be dismissed.” Finally, the court concluded, “Both the Transfer Petitions are accordingly dismissed.” The decision was made by a single judge bench, with no dissenting opinions.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petitions, indicating that it did not find sufficient grounds to move the cases from Madurai to Bangalore.
- The Court prioritized avoiding any prejudice to the ongoing litigations over the petitioner’s convenience.
- This decision underscores the importance of demonstrating a strong legal basis for transferring cases, rather than relying solely on personal convenience.
Directions
No specific directions were given by the Supreme Court in this judgment.
Development of Law
The judgment does not introduce any new legal principles or change any existing positions of law. The ratio decidendi is that transfer petitions under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, must demonstrate sufficient merit beyond convenience.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petitions filed by S.M. Shoba, seeking to move criminal and domestic violence proceedings from Madurai to Bangalore. The Court found no merit in the petitions and emphasized the need to avoid any potential prejudice to the ongoing litigations. This decision reinforces the principle that transfer of cases requires a strong legal basis, not just convenience.