This Article is written by Adv. Aman Chawla, Family Law Expert | Delhi High Court & Supreme Court of India

Practising in Family & Matrimonial Law | Jangpura, New Delhi

A matrimonial transfer petition is an application filed before the Supreme Court of India seeking to move a pending divorce, maintenance, custody, restitution of conjugal rights, or other matrimonial proceeding from one state to another. Civil matrimonial cases may be transferred under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, while criminal matrimonial matters may fall under Section 446 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Supreme Court considers factors such as genuine hardship, financial circumstances, health, safety, connected proceedings, and the overall ends of justice when deciding whether a case should be transferred.

Why This Guide Exists

Most people searching for “transfer petition” are in one of two positions. Either they’re the one who wants to move the case, usually because attending court in another city or state has become genuinely unworkable, or they’ve just been served notice that the other side has filed one, and they’re trying to figure out whether to fight it. I’ve drafted, opposed, and argued enough of these to know both sides ask the same underlying question in different words: is this actually going to work?

The honest answer depends entirely on the facts, but the pattern across decades of Supreme Court judgments is consistent enough to map out clearly. That’s what this guide does, walk through what a transfer petition actually is, which law applies to your specific situation, what real courts have actually decided, and what the process looks like from the first filing to the final order.

What a Transfer Petition Actually Is

Strip away the legal terminology and a transfer petition does one simple thing, it asks a higher court to move your case’s location. Not the outcome of the case, not the judge’s eventual decision, just where the case is physically heard.

This becomes necessary in matrimonial disputes more than almost anywhere else in Indian litigation, because marriages routinely span two states, the husband’s city and the wife’s parental city, and once separation happens, someone usually ends up litigating far from home. The Supreme Court’s own transfer petition data reflects this, matrimonial disputes make up a significant share of all transfer petitions filed before it every year.

The Three Legal Routes, and Which One Applies to You

This is where most people get confused, because there isn’t one single “transfer petition law.” There are three separate routes, and which one you use depends on two things, whether your case is civil or criminal, and whether the two courts are in the same state or different states.

Section 25 CPC, for civil matrimonial cases across states. If your case is a divorce petition, a restitution of conjugal rights petition, or a child custody matter, and the court you want to move from and the court you want to move to are in different states, Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is your provision. It empowers the Supreme Court, and only the Supreme Court, to transfer such a suit, appeal, or proceeding, where it’s satisfied that doing so serves the ends of justice.

Section 446 BNSS (formerly Section 406 CrPC), for criminal matrimonial matters across states. If what you’re trying to move is a maintenance application under Section 144 BNSS (the old Section 125 CrPC), a domestic violence complaint, or a criminal case like one under Section 85 BNS (the old 498A IPC), and again the courts are in different states, this is your provision. Since 1 July 2024, the old Section 406 CrPC has been renumbered as Section 446 BNSS, with the substance of the power unchanged, the Supreme Court may transfer a case or appeal from one High Court, or a subordinate criminal court, to another, where expedient for the ends of justice.

Section 24 CPC or Section 447 BNSS, for transfers within the same state. Here’s the detail people miss most often, and it costs them time and money. If both courts, the one your case is in and the one you want it moved to, are within the same state, you do not need to approach the Supreme Court at all. That application goes to the jurisdictional High Court instead, under Section 24 CPC for civil matters or the equivalent Section 447 BNSS for criminal matters. Filing a transfer petition in the Supreme Court when a High Court application would do only adds delay.

Who Can Actually File One

Here’s a myth worth correcting directly, because it shapes how people approach these cases from the start. It is not true that only wives can file transfer petitions, or that the Supreme Court automatically sides with the wife. Both spouses have an equal legal right to file, and the standard the Court applies, genuine hardship, convenience, safety, and the ends of justice, is the same regardless of who’s asking.

What is true is that the pattern of outcomes, built up over decades, leans toward the wife more often than not, and there’s a practical reason for it. Historically, more wives have found themselves litigating away from their parental home, without independent income, without local support, than husbands have. Courts responded to that pattern, not to gender as such. Where a husband can show genuine hardship, health issues, financial constraints, or risk to his safety, courts have transferred cases at his request too. The test doesn’t change based on who’s asking, only the facts do.

The Legal Test Courts Actually Apply

Section 25 CPC and Section 446 BNSS both use the same phrase, “expedient for the ends of justice”, and that phrase is deliberately broad. Over the decades, the Supreme Court has filled in what it actually means in practice, and the following factors show up again and again across the judgments.

Genuine financial hardship. Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel, (2000) 9 SCC 255. Where one spouse has no independent income and would struggle to fund travel, boarding, and legal costs in a distant city, that has repeatedly moved courts toward transfer. Here, the Supreme Court granted the wife’s transfer petition precisely because she had no independent income and couldn’t reasonably manage the cost of contesting proceedings in a different city.

Health, safety, and physical ability to travel. Anuradha Samir Vennangot v. Mohandas Samir Vennangot, (2015) 16 SCC 596; Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh, (2012) 6 SCC 742. In the first, the Court transferred proceedings to Hyderabad because of the wife’s serious, life-threatening illness, invoking what it called a pre-existing duty on the husband to ensure her health and safety were not compromised by where the case was heard. In the second, the presence of a small child and health concerns weighed heavily in favour of transfer.

Whether the hardship claimed is actually genuine. Anindita Das v. Srijit Das, (2006) 9 SCC 197; Gargi Konar v. Jagjeet Singh, (2005) 11 SCC 446. Courts have been equally willing to reject transfer petitions where the claimed hardship doesn’t hold up. In the first, transfer was refused because the petitioner was financially independent and hadn’t shown a real hardship, just an inconvenience. In the second, the Court held that financial incapacity alone, without more, wasn’t sufficient, particularly where the other side has offered to bear travel and litigation costs.

Whether the other side has offered to cover costs. Manish Chhabra, (2004) 13 SCC 411; Meenakshi v. Mukesh Kumar, (2004) 13 SCC 497. This comes up more than people expect. Where a husband offers to pay for the wife’s travel, stay, and litigation expenses, courts have sometimes treated that as sufficient to deny transfer. If you’re opposing a transfer petition, a genuine, enforceable offer to cover costs is one of your strongest tools.

Connected proceedings and clubbing of cases. N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199. Where multiple related cases, divorce, maintenance, a criminal complaint, are pending in different cities, courts increasingly favour transferring and clubbing them into one forum rather than making both parties litigate the same relationship dispute in two states simultaneously. Here, the Supreme Court weighed the parties’ economic position and the surrounding matrimonial circumstances, and directed transfer with connected proceedings clubbed before a single Family Court.

The wife’s convenience, treated as a strong factor, not an automatic rule. Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr., (2001) 10 SCC 41. The Supreme Court held that in matrimonial disputes, the wife’s convenience must be given primary importance when deciding a transfer petition. This is the judgment most often cited in support of transfer petitions filed by wives, and rightly so, but note the word “primary,” not “absolute.” It’s weighed against the facts, not applied blindly.

A Nuance Most Guides Get Wrong: The Video Conferencing Detour

Here’s something you’ll find in a lot of transfer petition articles online, a reference to Krishna Veni Nagam v. Harish Nagam, (2017) 4 SCC 150, where the Supreme Court suggested that instead of transferring a case, courts could direct video conferencing facilities, legal aid, and cost safeguards as an alternative. Many websites still cite this as current law. It isn’t, not on that specific point.

In Santhini v. Vijaya Venketesh, decided later in 2017 by a three-judge Bench, the Supreme Court expressly overruled Krishna Veni Nagam on the video conferencing direction. Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, in majority, held that video conferencing cannot be directed in a transfer petition itself, though it may still be used later at the Family Court’s discretion, after settlement efforts have failed and both parties consent. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud dissented, favouring wider use of technology. The Bench also held that hearings of matrimonial disputes may need to be conducted in camera, in view of the Family Courts Act, 1984. If you see an argument that “the Court will just order video conferencing instead of transferring,” know that this isn’t the settled position it’s sometimes presented as.

What Real Judgments Show, Beyond the Headline Cases

A few more decided cases round out the picture, because transfer petition outcomes genuinely turn on the specific facts, not a fixed formula.

In Annamma Abraham (Sherly) v. Abraham Jacob, (2000) 10 SCC 275, the wife sought transfer from Jodhpur to Kerala; the husband didn’t oppose the transfer itself but raised safety concerns about the specific district proposed. The Court accommodated that concern by transferring the case to a nearby district instead of the one the wife had originally requested, showing that transfer orders can be tailored, not just granted or refused outright.

In K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, (2013) 5 SCC 226, and again in later transfer petitions, the Supreme Court has repeatedly used its power under Article 142 of the Constitution alongside transfer jurisdiction to encourage mediation and settlement between the parties, sometimes converting a transfer petition into an opportunity to resolve the underlying dispute entirely.

Shri Sendhur Agro Oil Industries v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., 2025 INSC 328, decided by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, wasn’t a matrimonial matter, but it’s the most recent Supreme Court statement of the general factors relevant to a Section 406 CrPC (now Section 446 BNSS) transfer, and family courts and Supreme Court benches alike continue to draw on this same list, whether the prosecution or investigating machinery is compromised, whether witnesses face a real risk of influence or harm, the comparative hardship to each side, and whether a fair trial is genuinely achievable at the current venue.

What This Adds Up To For You

Pulling the case law together, here’s what tends to move a transfer petition in your favour, whichever side you’re on.

If you’re the one seeking transfer: build your petition around genuine, demonstrable hardship, not general inconvenience. A weak petition says “it’s difficult for me to travel.” A strong one attaches medical records, income documents, details of dependants, and shows exactly why the current venue creates a real barrier to a fair hearing, not just an inconvenient one.

If you’re opposing a transfer petition: your strongest tools are showing the claimed hardship isn’t genuine, financial independence, no real health issue, no dependants requiring local care, and offering concrete, enforceable arrangements, travel costs, accommodation, safety assurances, that neutralise the hardship being claimed.

If there are multiple related cases pending in different cities: raise that directly. Courts increasingly prefer consolidating connected matrimonial litigation into a single forum over leaving parties to fight parallel battles in two states.

How the Process Actually Works

A transfer petition under Section 25 CPC or Section 446 BNSS must be filed in the Supreme Court through an Advocate-on-Record, since ordinary advocates cannot directly file matters before the Supreme Court registry. The petition sets out the case details, which court the matter is currently pending in, the specific grounds for transfer, backed by documents, medical records, income proof, evidence of threats or safety concerns, whatever supports your claim, and a clear prayer asking the Court to transfer the case to a named, specific court.

Once filed and registered, the Court issues notice to the other side. The respondent then has to engage their own Advocate-on-Record and file a reply affidavit addressing each of your grounds. After both sides have filed their pleadings, the matter is listed for a final hearing, where the Court either allows or dismisses the transfer petition, sometimes after first attempting mediation between the parties, since transfer petitions are frequently used as an occasion to explore settlement.

A Realistic Example

A wife living with her parents in Lucknow is served with a divorce petition her husband has filed in Bengaluru, where he’s been posted for work. She has no independent income, a young child to care for, and no family support in Bengaluru. Rather than simply asserting inconvenience, her transfer petition attaches her bank statements showing no income, the child’s school records establishing where he currently studies, and a brief affidavit setting out the practical impossibility of repeatedly travelling to Bengaluru for hearings. The husband’s reply offers to bear her travel and stay expenses for each hearing instead of consenting to transfer. The Court weighs both, the genuine caregiving burden and lack of income on one side, against a workable financial offer on the other, and given the presence of a young child, following the reasoning in Rajwinder Kaur, directs transfer of the case to the Family Court in Lucknow.

What To Do Next

If you’re considering filing a transfer petition, start by being honest with yourself about which category your hardship actually falls into, genuine and documentable, or simply inconvenient. The first succeeds far more often than the second. If you’ve been served with one, don’t panic and don’t ignore it either, a well-drafted reply with a concrete, enforceable counter-offer has turned back many transfer petitions that looked strong on paper. Either way, this is not a DIY filing, an Advocate-on-Record is mandatory for Supreme Court transfer petitions, and the quality of the documentary evidence you attach is usually what decides the outcome.

Frequently Asked Questions

My husband has filed a case against me in another state. What can I do?

You can file a transfer petition asking the Supreme Court to move his case to a court near you, usually where you currently live. This is common when the wife has moved back to her parents’ city after separation and the husband files divorce or another matrimonial case in his own city. You’ll need to show genuine difficulty in travelling there, lack of income, a child to care for, health issues, or safety concerns, rather than simply saying it’s inconvenient.

How can I get my case transferred to my city?

You (through an Advocate-on-Record) file a transfer petition in the Supreme Court if the two cities are in different states, or before the High Court if they’re in the same state. The petition explains why the current court is genuinely difficult for you to attend, and asks the court to move the case to a specific court near you. The other side gets a chance to reply, and the court decides after hearing both sides.

What are the grounds for transfer of a matrimonial case?

The most commonly accepted grounds are financial hardship (no independent income to travel and litigate), serious health problems, having a young child to look after with no one to help while travelling, safety concerns or threats from the other side, and multiple related cases pending in different cities that would be easier to fight in one place. Simply finding the current city inconvenient, without more, usually isn’t enough.

My wife has filed a transfer petition against me. What should I do?

Don’t ignore the notice. Engage an Advocate-on-Record and file a reply addressing each ground she has raised. If her main complaint is the cost or difficulty of travelling, offering to pay her travel, stay, and litigation expenses is one of the strongest ways courts have accepted to resist a transfer. If her hardship claim doesn’t hold up, for instance, she has her own income or family support in that city, point that out clearly with proof.

Can I file a transfer petition myself, without a lawyer?

No. A transfer petition before the Supreme Court has to be filed through an Advocate-on-Record, a specific category of lawyer authorised to file matters directly in the Supreme Court registry. You can, and should, be closely involved in explaining your situation and gathering documents, but the filing itself needs an AOR.

Is it always the wife who gets the case transferred to her city?

No, though it happens more often than not. Courts look at genuine hardship, not gender. If a husband can show real difficulty, financial, medical, or otherwise, courts have transferred cases in his favour too. What matters is whether your specific situation shows a real, provable difficulty.

Do I have to go to the Supreme Court, or can my High Court help?

It depends on where the two courts are. If your case and the court you want it moved to are in different states, only the Supreme Court can transfer it. If they’re in the same state, just different cities or districts, your own High Court can do it, and that’s usually quicker and cheaper than going to the Supreme Court.

Can I get my 498A or dowry case transferred to my hometown?

Yes, this is a fairly common request, especially where the FIR was filed in the husband’s city and the wife now lives elsewhere, or vice versa. It’s done through the same transfer petition process, using Section 446 BNSS (the renumbered Section 406 CrPC) since it’s a criminal matter, not Section 25 CPC, which is only for civil cases like divorce.

Will the court just tell us to attend hearings by video call instead of transferring the case?

Not automatically, and this used to be a common misconception. Courts once suggested video conferencing as an alternative to transfer, but the Supreme Court later ruled that video conferencing cannot simply be ordered in place of a transfer petition. It may still come up later, but only if both sides agree to it after other options are exhausted.

What if my transfer petition gets rejected?

The case simply continues in the court it was originally filed in. Depending on your situation, the court may still direct the other side to bear your travel and accommodation costs for each hearing, even while declining to move the case itself, so it’s worth asking for this as a fallback in your petition.

How long does it usually take to get a transfer petition decided?

There’s no fixed timeline, it depends on how busy the Supreme Court’s docket is and whether both sides file their paperwork promptly. It’s generally resolved well before the underlying case itself would conclude, which is the entire point, it settles the question of where you’ll be litigating before you’ve invested years in the wrong court.

Conclusion

A transfer petition succeeds or fails on one question, is the hardship you’re describing genuine and demonstrable, or is it a general inconvenience dressed up in stronger language? Every verified judgment in this guide, from Sumita Singh through to the Santhini correction on video conferencing, points back to that same test. Courts are willing to move a case when the facts justify it, for either spouse, and equally willing to leave it exactly where it is when they don’t. Getting that judgment right for your own case takes an honest read of your documents against this body of law, not a guess based on what “usually happens.”

Adv. Aman Chawla practices matrimonial and family law before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court. For a consultation on your specific situation, reach out through the contact details on this website.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. As per the Rules of the Bar Council of India, advocates are not permitted to advertise or solicit work, and nothing in this article should be construed as advertising, solicitation, or an invitation to engage this firm. Readers should consult a qualified advocate regarding their specific circumstances before taking any legal action.