A Practical Guide for Litigants, Referring Advocates and Advocates-on-Record
Legal position reviewed and updated on 17 October 2026
Can a Divorce, Civil or Criminal Case Be Transferred to Another State?
Yes, subject to the applicable jurisdiction and the interests of justice. The Supreme Court may transfer qualifying civil and matrimonial proceedings from one State to another under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Criminal transfers follow a separate framework, principally Section 446 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), subject to the relevant savings provisions.
Where proceedings are pending far from a party’s residence, travel expense, health difficulties, responsibility for children, connected cases or a demonstrable risk to a fair trial may be relevant. Transfer is never automatic. The competent court examines the evidence, the nature of the proceeding and whether transferring the case would advance the interests of justice.
Not every inter-State dispute must begin in the Supreme Court. A common High Court may have jurisdiction over both courts under Section 24 CPC. This guide explains the correct forum, the grounds that matter, documentary proof, filing procedure and judicial authorities for litigants and referring advocates.
1. What Is a Transfer Petition?
A transfer petition is a legal proceeding through which a party requests a competent court to transfer an existing suit, appeal, criminal case or other proceeding from one court to another.
Its purpose is not to challenge the correctness of a judicial decision or obtain a determination of the merits of the underlying dispute.
Instead, the petitioner seeks a change of forum on grounds recognised by law.
The requested transfer may arise because of substantial hardship, connected proceedings, concerns relating to a fair trial or other circumstances affecting the administration of justice.
The competent court determines whether transfer is justified under the relevant legal provision.
The principal consideration is whether the transfer would advance the interests or ends of justice.
2. Which Court Has Jurisdiction to Transfer a Case?
The first and most important question is whether the transfer application should be filed before the District Court, High Court or Supreme Court.
Civil proceedings
Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 confers powers of transfer and withdrawal upon High Courts and District Courts within the statutory framework.
Section 25 CPC empowers the Supreme Court to transfer a suit, appeal or other civil proceeding from a High Court or civil court in one State to a High Court or civil court in another State, subject to the applicable statutory conditions.
However, the mere fact that two courts are located in different States does not invariably mean that the Supreme Court is the only competent forum.
The common-High-Court exception
In Shah Newaz Khan v. State of Nagaland, 2023 INSC 176, decided on 28 February 2023, the Supreme Court considered the relationship between Sections 24 and 25 CPC in the context of States sharing a common High Court.
The Court clarified that a common High Court exercising jurisdiction over two or more States may transfer civil proceedings between subordinate courts situated in those States under Section 24 CPC, where both courts are subordinate to that High Court and the proposed transferee court is otherwise competent.
The judgment recognised that Section 25 CPC does not exclusively govern every inter-State transfer.
This distinction is particularly relevant in areas served by a common High Court under Article 231 of the Constitution.
Accordingly, advocates should identify the appropriate forum before instituting a transfer petition.
3. Transfer of Civil Proceedings Under Section 25 CPC
Section 25 CPC empowers the Supreme Court to direct transfer of civil proceedings where such transfer is expedient for the ends of justice.
The provision concerns the transfer of suits, appeals or other proceedings from a High Court or civil court in one State to a High Court or civil court in another State, within the statutory framework.
The application must be made by a party and supported by an affidavit.
Under Section 25(2) CPC, the Court considers transfer after notice to the parties and hearing such of them as desire to be heard, subject to the applicable procedure.
The Supreme Court exercises this jurisdiction judicially and on consideration of the relevant circumstances.
Transfer is not granted merely because one party prefers another court.
The petitioner must demonstrate why continuation before the existing court would cause legally relevant hardship, prejudice or other difficulties justifying intervention in the interests of justice.
4. Matrimonial Transfer Petitions
Matrimonial disputes constitute an important category of civil transfer proceedings.
A spouse may seek transfer of proceedings concerning divorce, restitution of conjugal rights, annulment or another matrimonial remedy where the existing forum creates substantial difficulties.
Relevant considerations may include:
- Financial circumstances of the spouses.
- Residence and livelihood.
- Responsibility for minor children.
- Health conditions or disability.
- Distance and practical travel difficulties.
- Availability of family support.
- Pendency of connected matrimonial proceedings.
- The ability of each party to participate meaningfully.
- The overall interests of justice.
The Court assesses these circumstances together.
No single consideration necessarily determines the result.
Example: Divorce Proceedings in Another State
Suppose a divorce petition is pending in Jaipur, while the respondent lives in Lucknow and is responsible for a minor child. A transfer application should not merely state that travel is inconvenient. It should explain the distance, frequency of hearings, childcare responsibilities, financial position, available support and any connected proceedings, supported by relevant documents. The Court weighs the circumstances of both sides; the example does not imply that transfer must be ordered.
5. Is the Convenience of the Wife an Important Consideration?
Yes. However, it is not an automatic or conclusive ground for transfer.
In N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, Civil Appeal No. 4894 of 2022, decided on 18 July 2022, the Supreme Court examined the principles governing transfer of matrimonial proceedings.
The Court recognised the importance of the wife’s convenience in the prevailing social and economic circumstances.
It also considered the financial position of the parties, their circumstances of livelihood and the desirability of hearing connected proceedings together where appropriate.
The judgment is an important authority concerning matrimonial transfer jurisdiction.
Nevertheless, it should not be interpreted as establishing that every transfer petition filed by a wife must be allowed.
The facts of each case and the interests of justice remain decisive.
6. Can a Husband Seek Transfer of Matrimonial Proceedings?
Yes.
A husband may also seek transfer of matrimonial proceedings where the statutory conditions are satisfied.
Such an application must be assessed on its own merits.
Relevant circumstances may include serious illness, disability, substantial difficulties in attending proceedings, responsibility for dependants, pendency of connected cases or other factors affecting meaningful participation.
The mere fact that the applicant is the husband does not legally prohibit transfer.
Equally, a general assertion of inconvenience without supporting circumstances does not necessarily justify the relief.
The Court must consider whether the requested transfer is warranted in the interests of justice.
7. Can the Supreme Court Refuse a Matrimonial Transfer Petition?
Yes.
The Supreme Court retains discretion to refuse transfer where the grounds do not justify changing the forum.
The Court may also examine whether procedural arrangements can address the hardship relied upon by the applicant.
For example, in Munesh Devi v. Akash Yadav, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1998 of 2024, decided on 17 July 2025, the Supreme Court declined transfer in circumstances involving disability affecting both parties and referred to the possible use of video-conferencing facilities.
Similarly, in Arun Bakshi v. Sonam Sharma, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 3244 of 2024, order dated 14 July 2025, the Court considered virtual participation in relation to hearing difficulties.
These decisions illustrate that transfer is not a routine consequence of inconvenience.
The Court examines the comparative circumstances of the parties and the available procedural alternatives.
8. Transfer of Connected Matrimonial Proceedings
Sometimes different proceedings arising out of the same matrimonial relationship are pending before courts in different places.
For example, divorce proceedings may be pending in one city while another proceeding concerning matrimonial rights is pending elsewhere.
Such circumstances may be relevant where the proceedings involve common questions or closely connected factual disputes.
In N.C.V. Aishwarya, the Supreme Court recognised the desirability of having interconnected proceedings considered together where appropriate.
This may help reduce duplication, unnecessary hardship and the possibility of inconsistent findings.
However, different matrimonial, maintenance and criminal proceedings may be governed by distinct jurisdictional and transfer provisions.
Their transfer cannot be assumed merely because they arise from the same marriage.
Each proceeding must be examined under the applicable law.
9. Transfer of Criminal Cases Before the Supreme Court
The transfer of criminal proceedings is governed by a separate statutory framework.
Section 446 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 empowers the Supreme Court to transfer criminal cases and appeals in the circumstances prescribed by that provision when such transfer is expedient for the ends of justice.
The provision concerns transfers between High Courts and between criminal courts under the jurisdiction of different High Courts, within its statutory scope.
Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was the corresponding provision under the earlier procedural law.
The BNSS came into force on 1 July 2024.
Section 531 BNSS contains the repeal-and-savings provisions, which must be examined in relation to proceedings that were pending when the new law commenced.
The applicability of Section 406 CrPC or Section 446 BNSS must therefore be determined with reference to the nature, institution and transitional status of the proceeding.
A transfer petition should not rely on the old and new provisions indiscriminately.
10. Supreme Court Rules Governing Criminal Transfer Petitions
Order XXXIX of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 governs applications for transfer of criminal proceedings within its applicable framework.
It prescribes that the petition should be in writing and should set out the relevant facts, particulars of the case, relief sought and grounds for transfer in separate paragraphs.
The petition must be supported by an affidavit or affirmation.
The Rules provide for preliminary consideration by the Court.
Where the Court finds that no prima facie case for transfer has been established or that the petition is otherwise untenable, it may dismiss the application.
Where a prima facie case is made out, the Court may direct issuance of notice to the relevant parties.
The applicable provisions also address responses and the possible consequences of frivolous or vexatious applications.
In Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. M/s HEG Ltd., 2025 INSC 1362, decided on 28 November 2025, the Supreme Court considered criminal transfer petitions instituted under Section 446 BNSS read with Order XXXIX of the Supreme Court Rules.
The judgment provides a contemporary illustration of the procedural framework used for such petitions.
11. What Grounds May Justify Transfer of a Criminal Case?
The governing consideration is whether transfer is necessary or expedient for the ends of justice.
The assurance of a fair and impartial trial occupies a central position.
Relevant circumstances may include:
- A reasonable apprehension that a fair trial cannot be conducted in the existing forum.
- Serious interference with the administration of criminal justice.
- Threats or circumstances materially affecting witnesses or participants.
- Other substantial grounds showing that justice may be prejudiced if proceedings continue before the existing court.
The apprehension relied upon must have an objectively reasonable foundation.
General dissatisfaction, ordinary inconvenience or unsupported allegations of influence are not necessarily sufficient.
The Supreme Court must examine the circumstances and determine whether the statutory standard is met.
12. Leading Judgment: Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani
In Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani, (1979) 4 SCC 167, the Supreme Court considered the transfer of criminal proceedings under Section 406 CrPC.
The judgment emphasises that assurance of a fair trial is central to the transfer jurisdiction.
A party’s desire for a different location or subjective apprehension is not, by itself, a sufficient basis for transfer.
The Court must consider whether the circumstances disclose a reasonable foundation for apprehending prejudice to the proper administration of justice.
The principles articulated in this judgment remain relevant when considering the exercise of transfer jurisdiction under the successor statutory framework, subject to the applicable law.
13. Transfer Under Article 139A of the Constitution
Article 139A of the Constitution provides a distinct constitutional framework concerning certain proceedings pending before High Courts.
Article 139A(1) concerns cases involving the same or substantially the same questions of law, where those questions are substantial questions of general importance and the other constitutional conditions are satisfied.
Article 139A(2) empowers the Supreme Court to transfer a case, appeal or other proceeding pending before one High Court to another High Court where the constitutional requirements are met.
These powers are distinct from routine transfers of matrimonial proceedings between Family Courts.
Order XL and Order XLI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 address the relevant categories of applications under Article 139A.
The correct provision must be identified having regard to the nature and status of the proceedings.
14. Procedure for Filing a Civil Transfer Petition Before the Supreme Court
Order XLI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 governs applications under Section 25 CPC and Article 139A(2) of the Constitution.
A petition should state succinctly and clearly the relevant facts, the court where the proceeding is pending and the grounds on which transfer is sought.
It must be supported by an affidavit.
The practical steps generally include:
- Identifying the correct jurisdictional provision.
- Obtaining the relevant pleadings and orders from the pending case.
- Accurately identifying the existing court and case number.
- Identifying the proposed transferee court and its legal competence.
- Preparing the grounds establishing why transfer is sought.
- Supporting material factual assertions through appropriate records.
- Preparing the petition and affidavit in accordance with the applicable Supreme Court Rules.
- Completing the prescribed electronic filing process.
- Complying with Registry scrutiny and service requirements.
- Attending the proceedings in accordance with the Court’s directions.
A transfer petition may be placed before the Supreme Court for preliminary consideration.
The Court may dismiss the petition where no prima facie case exists or issue notice where further consideration is warranted.
15. What Documents Are Required?
Documentary requirements depend on the nature of the case and the grounds advanced.
Relevant material may include:
- Copy of the principal pleading pending before the existing court.
- Orders and relevant proceedings showing the case’s present status.
- Particulars of the parties and courts concerned.
- Documents concerning residence, where relevant.
- Records supporting financial hardship, illness or disability, where relied upon.
- Information concerning connected proceedings.
- Affidavit verifying material facts.
- Authorisation and filing documents required under the applicable Rules.
The exact requirements must be checked against the current Supreme Court Rules, electronic filing directions and Registry instructions.
The same documentary checklist does not necessarily apply to every transfer petition.
Practical Filing Mistakes to Avoid
A transfer petition can fail even where the applicant faces genuine difficulty if the chosen forum, supporting records or interim-relief strategy is incorrect. Before filing, check the following:
- Wrong forum: Check whether the case belongs before a District Court, a common High Court or the Supreme Court.
- Unsupported hardship: Match each material ground to available medical, financial, residence or connected-case records.
- Proposed court lacking jurisdiction: Confirm that the transferee court can legally hear the proceeding.
- No interim relief: Filing a transfer petition does not by itself stay the original case.
- Unverified procedural advice: Do not rely on blanket promises about filing time, likely duration, video conferencing or the result.
16. Does Filing a Transfer Petition Automatically Stay the Original Case?
No.
The mere filing of a transfer petition does not automatically stay the proceedings pending before the existing court.
A stay or other interim protection requires an appropriate judicial order.
The Supreme Court may grant interim protection in suitable circumstances.
For example, in Neeta Singh v. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 257 of 2024, the relevant Supreme Court record refers to interim protection concerning the matrimonial proceeding.
Such orders illustrate that interim relief may be available, but its grant depends upon judicial discretion.
A litigant should not stop attending or complying with directions of the original court merely because a transfer petition has been instituted.
17. Can Video Conferencing Be an Alternative to Transfer?
Yes, depending upon the circumstances.
Modern court procedures increasingly permit appropriate use of video-conferencing facilities.
The availability of such facilities may be relevant where a party relies upon travel hardship or difficulties attending proceedings.
In some cases, the Court may consider whether virtual participation can adequately address the difficulties without changing the forum.
However, video conferencing is not a universal substitute for transfer.
Its suitability depends on the nature of the proceeding, evidentiary requirements, availability of facilities and directions of the competent court.
Where personal attendance is legally required, appropriate judicial permission or exemption may be necessary.
18. Can Matrimonial Transfer Proceedings Be Referred to Mediation?
Yes.
Where the nature of the dispute and circumstances justify it, matrimonial matters may be referred to mediation or another appropriate settlement process.
A transfer petition can provide an occasion for parties to explore an amicable resolution of connected matrimonial issues.
However, transfer jurisdiction and matrimonial adjudication remain legally distinct.
The filing of a transfer petition does not automatically result in a settlement, divorce or final determination of the matrimonial dispute.
Any mediation or settlement process remains subject to the applicable law and judicial directions.
19. What Happens After a Transfer Petition Is Allowed?
When the Supreme Court allows a transfer petition, the proceeding is transferred to the court designated in its order.
The relevant case records must be transmitted or made available in accordance with the Court’s directions.
In civil proceedings transferred under Section 25 CPC, the transferee court may, subject to any special directions, either retry the proceeding or continue it from the stage at which it was transferred.
A transfer order does not ordinarily determine the substantive merits of the original dispute.
The parties remain entitled to pursue their respective claims and defences in accordance with law.
The applicable procedural consequences depend upon the governing statute and the terms of the transfer order.
20. Frequently Asked Questions
Can a divorce case be transferred from one State to another?
Yes, where the applicable statutory conditions are satisfied and the interests of justice justify transfer.
Can a wife automatically obtain transfer to the place where she resides?
No. Her convenience and circumstances are relevant considerations, but transfer is not automatic.
Can a husband apply for transfer?
Yes. The application must establish legally relevant grounds.
Can criminal proceedings be transferred solely because the accused resides elsewhere?
Ordinary inconvenience or distance alone is generally insufficient to establish the grounds required for criminal transfer jurisdiction.
Does filing a transfer petition automatically stop proceedings in the original court?
No. A specific judicial stay order is necessary.
Can the Supreme Court refuse a transfer petition?
Yes. Transfer is discretionary and may be refused where the statutory conditions or relevant grounds are not established.
Can related matrimonial cases be transferred to one court?
Their interconnection may be relevant, but each proceeding must be examined under its applicable jurisdictional and transfer provisions.
Can the Court allow virtual participation instead of transferring the case?
Where legally and practically appropriate, the Court may consider video conferencing or related procedural directions.
21. Practical Checklist for Litigants and Advocates
Before instituting a transfer petition, the following questions should be examined:
- What is the nature of the pending proceeding?
- What is the statutory or constitutional basis for the proposed transfer?
- Which court is competent to consider the application?
- Are both courts situated within the jurisdiction of a common High Court?
- Is the proposed transferee court legally competent to hear the case?
- What concrete circumstances justify the requested transfer?
- Are relevant documents available to support the pleaded grounds?
- Are related proceedings pending before another court?
- Can participation difficulties be addressed through appropriate procedural directions?
- Is interim protection necessary while the transfer petition is pending?
- Have the current Supreme Court Rules and filing requirements been examined?
- Has the application been properly supported by an affidavit?
These questions help prevent unnecessary proceedings and assist in identifying the appropriate legal remedy.
Conclusion
Transfer petitions before the Supreme Court of India serve an important function where continuation of judicial proceedings before the existing court may be inconsistent with the interests of justice.
However, transfer is not an automatic consequence of inconvenience or distance.
Civil, matrimonial, criminal and constitutional transfers are governed by distinct provisions and legal principles.
In matrimonial matters, the Court examines financial circumstances, practical hardship, family responsibilities, connected litigation and the comparative convenience of the parties. The convenience of the wife is important but not invariably decisive.
In criminal matters, the need to secure a fair trial and protect the proper administration of justice remains central.
The decision in Shah Newaz Khan v. State of Nagaland also demonstrates the importance of determining whether a common High Court possesses transfer jurisdiction under Section 24 CPC before approaching the Supreme Court.
For litigants, the essential task is to establish genuine grounds and identify the appropriate court.
For advocates, careful examination of maintainability, jurisdiction, applicable statutory provisions, procedural requirements and supporting facts is indispensable.
Principal Legal References
Statutory and Constitutional Provisions
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Sections 24 and 25.
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 446 and 531, as applicable.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 406, where saved by transitional provisions.
- Constitution of India — Articles 139A and 231.
- Supreme Court Rules, 2013, as amended — Orders XXXIX, XL and XLI, as applicable.
Judicial Decisions
- Shah Newaz Khan v. State of Nagaland, 2023 INSC 176, Civil Appeal No. 1497 of 2023, decided on 28 February 2023.
- N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, Civil Appeal No. 4894 of 2022, decided on 18 July 2022.
- Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani, (1979) 4 SCC 167.
- Munesh Devi v. Akash Yadav, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1998 of 2024, order dated 17 July 2025.
- Arun Bakshi v. Sonam Sharma, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 3244 of 2024, order dated 14 July 2025.
- Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. M/s HEG Ltd., 2025 INSC 1362, decided on 28 November 2025.
Official Legal Resources
Supreme Court Rules and Amendments
Supreme Court Rules and amendments (official website)
Supreme Court Electronic Filing
Supreme Court e-filing (official website)
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — India Code
Read the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (India Code PDF)
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — India Code
Read the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (India Code PDF)
New Criminal Laws — Ministry of Home Affairs
New criminal laws (Ministry of Home Affairs)
Supreme Court Judgment — Shah Newaz Khan v. State of Nagaland
Shah Newaz Khan judgment (Indian Kanoon)
Supreme Court Judgment — Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. M/s HEG Ltd.
Read Jai Balaji Industries judgment (Supreme Court PDF)
Related Supreme Court Practice Resources
For an overview of Supreme Court remedies, filing pathways and procedural questions, see the Supreme Court Practice & Procedure resource hub. Related published resources address Special Leave Petitions, review petitions, curative petitions and the duties of an Advocate-on-Record. Follow the links in that hub to the applicable guide rather than assuming that a transfer petition is a substitute for an appeal or SLP.
Legal Information Notice
This article is intended solely for general legal awareness and professional information. It does not constitute legal advice concerning an individual case.
The applicable statutory provisions, transitional and savings clauses, Supreme Court Rules, amendments, current Registry requirements and relevant judicial decisions must be examined in relation to the particular proceeding.
JVR Law Office is an independent professional website and is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Supreme Court of India.