Allahabad High Court

VAIBHAV DHAMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 4 May 2026
Bench: VIKRAM D CHAUHAN

Holding

No ground for transfer exists; the applicant may seek video‑conferencing under the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in Uttar Pradesh, 2020.

Summary

The applicant, an Air Force officer, filed a transfer application seeking to move four criminal cases pending in Bareilly to another district, citing his posting and inability to attend court. He argued that video conferencing would enable his participation. The court referred to its earlier decision in Transfer Application (Criminal) No. 282 of 2021, which recognized a litigant's right to appear via video conferencing under the Uttar Pradesh Rules of 2020. It held that the Rules provide a sufficient alternative and that no statutory ground for transfer exists. Consequently, the transfer application was dismissed, with liberty granted to the applicant to apply for video‑conferencing under the Rules.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant's posting and inability to attend in person justify transferring the criminal cases to another district.
Whether the availability of video‑conferencing under the Uttar Pradesh Rules of 2020 obviates the need for transfer.
Whether the precedent set in Transfer Application (Criminal) No. 282 of 2021 precludes transfer in such circumstances.

Subjects

transfer of criminal cases
video conferencing
Uttar Pradesh Rules 2020
jurisdiction
Section 145(2) B.N.S.S.
Section 144(3) B.N.S.S.
Article 225 Constitution of India
Article 227 Constitution of India

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 280 of 2026

Vaibhav Dhama
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shivanshu Singh, U.C. Chaturvedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 73
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present transfer application has been filed for transfer of Case No.
1853 of 2025 (Vaibhav Dhama Vs. Smt. Babita Dhama @ Babita Rani)
under Section 145(2) of B.N.S.S., Police Station Subhash Nagar, District
Bareilly and Case No. 2572 of 2025 (Smt. Babita Dhama @ Babita Rani Vs.
Vaibhav Dhama) under Section 144(3) of B.N.S.S., Police Station Subhash
Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Principal Judge,
Family Court, Court No. 3, Bareilly as well as Case No. 1456(1453) (Smt.
Babita Dhama @Babita Rani Vs. Vaibhav Dhama) under Section 144(3) of
B.N.S.S., Police Station Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly, from District
Judiciary Bareilly to any other District Court of competent jurisdiction.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband
and is working in the Air Force and the maintenance proceedings have been
drawn by the wife against the applicant in respect of which recall application
has been filed by the applicant pending consideration. The applicant on
account of posting in various places is not able to participate in the
proceedings of the court concerned and as such the transfer application is
filed. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that ends of justice
would be served in the event applicant is permitted to appear before the
court concerned through video conferencing.

4. This Court in Transfer Application (Criminal) No. 282 of 2021 (Smt.
Sunita Devi Vs. State of U.P. and another), decided on 2nd August,
2022, has recognized the right of the litigant to participate in the judicial
proceedings through video conferencing facility in pursuance to the Rules
for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 (for
brevity hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 2020").
TACR No. 280 of 2026
2

5. Comprehensive rules have been put in place to adopt the technology in
judicial proceedings in order to enable the litigants to approach the court
through digital mode. The Rules of 2020 gives choice to the litigant to
approach court using digital technology. Various checks and balances have
been provided under the aforesaid Rules of 2020 to protect the sanctity of
the judicial process.

6. The Rules of 2020 effectively address the concern of the litigants
including the distance factor, threat perception and convenience. Once the
Rules of 2020 have been notified in exercise of powers under Article 225
and 227 of the Constitution of India, for providing video conferencing
facility to the litigant in the Courts and such an alternative channel will be
able to address the concerns of the litigant as has been raised in the present
transfer application. No ground for transfer of the case from one district to
another is made out in view of the law laid down in Transfer Application
(Criminal) No. 282 of 2021 (Smt. Sunita Devi Vs. State of U.P. and
another), decided on 2nd August, 2022.

7. Under the circumstances, the present transfer application is disposed of
with the liberty to the applicant to apply under Rules for Video Conferencing
for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 for video conference facility in
judicial proceedings. It is hereby provided that in case any application is
preferred by the applicant under the aforesaid Rules, the court/authority
concerned shall be obliged under law to pass an appropriate order in
accordance with law at the earliest. It is hereby directed that all courts and
authorities shall act in aid of the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in
the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020.
May 5, 2026
VMA
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VISHWA MOHAN ARORA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…