[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Urn: Cta / 121U / 2026Shri Anil Alias ... vs Rekha (2026:Rj-Jd:20149) on 28 April, 2026
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2026:RJ-JD:20149]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 47/2026
Shri Anil Alias Ghanshyam S/o Shri Ratanlal, Aged About 30
Years, R/o In front Of Cinemagic Road No 05 In front Of Bheru
Mandir Near Partaram Ate Ki Chakki, District Bikaner
----Petitioner
Versus
Rekha W/o Shri Anil Alias Ghanshyam, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
In front of Cinemagic Road No 05 In front Of Bheru Mandir Near
Partaram Ate Ki Chakki District Bikaner At Present Resident Of
Choudhary Colony Near Sampat Palace Bhawan Nokha Road
Bikaner.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nishank Madhan
Ms. Reema Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Navneet Singh for
Mr. Kaushal Gautam
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
28/04/2026
1. The present transfer petition has been filed with a prayer
that Case No. 90/2021; Rekha Vs. Anil @ Ghanshyam (under
Section 10 and 12 of Guardians & Wards Act, 1890) as filed on
behalf of respondent wife/mother pending before Family Court No.
3, Bikaner be transferred to any other Family Court at Bikaner.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Court,
vide order dated 20.11.2025, directed that the minor girl child be
kept present before the Court on each date of hearing so that the
respondent mother could meet her. On 23.01.2026, a request was
made on behalf of the Counsel that it being the school timings of
the minor girl, she would be kept present after 02.30 p.m. i.e.
(Uploaded on 03/05/2026 at 06:25:45 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20149] (2 of 4) [CTA-47/2026]
after school hours. Just because the child got a bit late, the Court
proceeded on to direct ex parte proceedings against the
defendant. Although the said order was subsequently recalled but
then the observations made by the Court on the said date reveal
that the Presiding Officer is acting in excess of jurisdiction in so far
as personal observations against the parties are being made.
3. Counsel submits that it is a matter wherein the application in
question, initially, stood dismissed for non prosecution in the year
2022. The plaintiff mother took no action for a period of three
years and it is only in the year 2025 that the present application
was restored. The order of personal appearance of the minor on
every date of hearing before the Court reflects that the Court is
inconsiderate of the welfare of the child or the impact of the same
on her mental health.
4. Further, the observations made in order dated 23.01.2026
reflect that the Presiding Officer is acting with bias and the matter
requires to be transferred to some other Family Court at Bikaner.
5. Per contra Counsel for the respondent submits that despite
order dated 20.11.2025 been passed, the child was not presented
before the Court on any occasion and hence, the Court rightly
passed order dated 23.01.2026. The said order clearly reflects
that the observations made are considerate enough for welfare of
the child. He submits that there is no reason, whatsoever, to
transfer the petition to some other Court.
6. Heard the Counsels. Perused the record.
7. Although order dated 20.11.2025 passed by the Family Court
is not under challenge in the present petition but then this Court
feels constrained to observe that such orders whereby a minor
(Uploaded on 03/05/2026 at 06:25:45 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20149] (3 of 4) [CTA-47/2026]
child is directed to be kept present before the Court on each date
of hearing, is nothing more than a punishment for the child
himself/ herself.
8. Further, when it is an admitted fact that the child is a school
going student, the said fact does deserve due consideration by the
Court while passing such order. Furthermore, the impact on the
mental health of the child because of appearing on each date
before the Court alike a litigant, also requires to be kept into
consideration.
9. After perusing order dated 20.11.2025 and further order
dated 23.01.2026, this Court deems it proper, maybe not in the
interest of the parties concerned, but in the interest and welfare of
the minor child that the matter be transferred to some other
Court. The present transfer application deserves to be and is
hereby allowed.
10. Case No.90/2021; Rekha Vs. Anil @ Ghanshyam pending
before Family Court No.3, Bikaner is directed to be transferred to
Family Court No.1, Bikaner for trial and disposal in accordance
with law.
11. Family Court No.3, Bikaner is directed to send the complete
file/record of Case No.90/2021; Rekha Vs. Anil @ Ghanshyam to
Family Court No.1, Bikaner within a period of two weeks from the
receipt of the certified copy of the present order while fixing the
next date in the matter for appearance of the parties before the
transferee Court.
12. The petitioner as well as the respondent shall remain present
before Family Court No.1, Bikaner on the date as fixed and the
(Uploaded on 03/05/2026 at 06:25:45 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20149] (4 of 4) [CTA-47/2026]
transferee Court shall not be under an obligation to issue fresh
notices to any of the parties as the present order is being passed
in presence of Counsel for both the parties.
13. Needless to observe that if any application is filed by any of
the parties with a request to permit him/her to appear through
Video Conferencing, the learned Court shall be at liberty to decide
the same, keeping into consideration the fact whether the physical
appearance of the said party is essential on the said date.
14. Let a certified copy of the present order be sent forthwith
each to Family Court No.3, Bikaner and Family Court No.1,
Bikaner.
15. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
33-manila/-
(Uploaded on 03/05/2026 at 06:25:45 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
