Section 125 CrPC  | Wife's Convenience Must Be Looked At In Matrimonial Disputes: Orissa High Court Rejects Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case

"Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer." Orissa High Court, in a significant ruling dated August 21, 2026, held that the convenience of the wife must be prioritized while adjudicating transfer petitions arising out of matrimonial disputes.

Dismissing a husband's plea to transfer maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), a single bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra reiterated that courts must assess the socio-economic realities and practical hardships faced by the wife when deciding transfer applications.

The petitioner-husband had approached the High Court seeking the transfer of maintenance proceedings in CRP No. 136 of 2024 from the Family Court, Jajpur to the Family Court, Bhubaneswar. He cited medical complications arising from cancer treatment and his employment at IIT Bhubaneswar as grounds for inability to travel. The opposite party-wife opposed the plea, highlighting that she was a deserted woman living with her aged mother and caring for a four-year-old child without any independent livelihood.

The primary question before the court was whether the maintenance proceedings under Section 125 CrPC ought to be transferred from Jajpur to Bhubaneswar on the husband's medical and professional grounds. The court was also called upon to determine whether the convenience of a destitute wife with a minor child outweighed the travel difficulties alleged by the employed husband.

Primacy Of Wife's Convenience In Matrimonial Transfer Petitions

Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra reiterated the cardinal principles governing matrimonial transfer petitions under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and CrPC, emphasizing that the ends of justice require courts to evaluate the financial capability and social standing of the parties. The bench observed that the socio-economic status of spouses plays a decisive role in determining the balance of convenience in such litigations.

The High Court placed strong reliance on the Supreme Court precedent in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199), reaffirming the settled legal position that the wife's convenience is paramount when deciding venue changes in matrimonial proceedings.

"The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties... Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer."

Husband's Medical Grounds Countered By Admission Of Recovery

Evaluating the husband's contention that he was undergoing cancer treatment at AIIMS Bhubaneswar, the Court took note of the wife's counter-submission pointing to his own pleadings in paragraph 7 of the transfer petition. The bench observed that the husband had himself admitted in his petition that after undergoing surgery, he was fine with medications and actively leading his life while working as a Senior Assistant at IIT Argul, Bhubaneswar.

In contrast, the Court observed that the wife was a deserted lady without any source of income, residing approximately 120 kilometers away in Jajpur with her four-year-old child and elderly mother. The bench noted that requiring her to travel to Bhubaneswar for every date of the maintenance case instituted under Section 125 CrPC would cause severe distress and financial hardship.

Recourse To Virtual Hearings Under High Court Video Conferencing Rules

To balance the equities and alleviate the husband's travel concerns, the High Court granted both parties the liberty to participate in the proceedings through virtual mode before the Family Court at Jajpur. Justice Mishra instructed the trial court to utilize the available video conferencing infrastructure in accordance with the prescribed statutory rules.

The bench directed the learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur to explore video conferencing facilities under the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for Courts Rules, 2020, allowing virtual appearances except on dates of effective hearing, such as the recording of witness evidence and cross-examinations where physical presence is mandated.

Time-Bound Conclusion Of Maintenance Proceedings

Taking note of the fact that the maintenance petition was initiated in 2024 and had been stalled due to an interim stay order, the Court vacated the interim stay order dated August 22, 2024. The bench directed both parties to refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournments and instructed the Family Court, Jajpur to conclude the Section 125 CrPC proceedings expeditiously, preferably by the end of December 2026.

Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra dismissed the transfer petition, reaffirming that the socio-economic vulnerability of a dependent wife and child takes precedence over the convenience of an earning husband in matrimonial venue disputes. The ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that maintenance claims remain accessible to destitute spouses without procedural impedance.

Date of Decision: 21 August 2026