JUDGMENT A.S. Tripathi, J. 1. This petition has been presented u/Sec. 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for transfer of Criminal Case No. 266/94 pending in the Court of Shri J.K. Verma, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sironj to any other Judicial Magistrate First Class at Datia or Babra or nearby area. 2. The petitioner, in her petition, alleged that a dispute is going on and a petition has been presented u/Sec. 498A of the I.P.C. pending at Sironj. The petitioner, being a lady has to attend the Court and she may not be able to produce her witnesses as number of means of harassment is being adopted by me opposite parties in the course of the trial. The dispute between the parties is regarding the marriage of the petitioner with Dr. Syed Mohammad Haider who is opposite party in the case. The petitioner, in her petition further alleged that on certain dates fixed at Sironj, certain orders were passed by the Court without hearing her Counsel. Further, she herself is feeling danger to her life in going to Sironj to contest me case. It is also mentioned that Sironj is not connected with any Railway Station nor there are proper means of communication from the place of her parents, which is of Datia. In these circumstances the petitioner, being a lady, prays for transfer of Criminal Case No. 266/94 from Sironj to a place near Datia so that she may appear herself and may be able to produce her witnesses in Court while contesting the trial, and the fair trial may be ensured. 3. The reply has been filed by the respondents alleging therein that the petitioner is the sister of the two judicial officers and, therefore, she is taking advantage of the position of her brothers who are influencial judicial officers and it will not be proper to transfer the case from Sironj to any other place otherwise the petitioner may take advantage of her two brothers, who are influendal judicial officers and fair trial of the case may be conducted at Sironj itself. 4. After hearing Mr.Sanjay Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. T.C. Bansal and Mr. A.K. Barua, learned Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 6 and Ms. 4. After hearing Mr.Sanjay Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. T.C. Bansal and Mr. A.K. Barua, learned Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 6 and Ms. Nutan Saxena, Counsel for the respondent/State and after perusal of the facts of the case and papers filed it appears that the petitioner was married with opposite party No. 1 sometime back. A dispute arose and a petition u/Sec. 498A of the I.P.C. has been moved at Sironj. Thereafter, the petition was being tried at Sironj for quite sometime then the proceedings were held up on account of failure of one party or the other. 5. Now, the petitioner feels that she may not be able to get a fair trial at Sironj on account of the fact that her witnesses could not be produced at Sironj, which is at a far distance from the place of her parents. There are no means of communication at Sironj available to me petitioner and she herself is facing danger to her life in going to Sironj, her witnesses may also be harassed while going to Sironj from Datia. In these circumstances, a prayer has been made by the petitioner that the case be transferred either at Datia or Dabra or any other area near to Datia, which is the native place of the petitioner. Therefore, in such a situation, looking to the convenience of the parties and their witnesses, a fair trial has to be ensured at a place where both me parties can easily approach and may not be able to complain that the parties or their witnesses are being harassed in die way. 6. Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is very clear in this respect which is quoted below : "407. (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court- (a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or (b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise, or (c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice. it may order- (i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified Under Sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive) but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence; (ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction; (iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Sessions; or (iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself." The scope of Section 407 is very wide and general. This Court has to ensure fair trial of the case and this Court has also to keep in mind the general convenience of the parties or their witnesses and also the place which will be expedient for the ends of justice in this respect. 7. After hearing learned Counsel for both the parties and the heat generated in this Court on account of their different stand with a view to harass each other wherever the trial will be sent for conclusion, looking to the convenience of both the parties where they may not be able to harass each other in the way or their witnesses may not be tampered in either way, further to ensure the fair trial of the case and for the ends of justice it is desirable that the case be transferred to the judgeship at Gwalior which is under nose of this Court where proper supervision can be ensured and fair trial can be given to the parties concerned. The wild allegation made on behalf of the opposite parties that the petitioner happens to be sister of the two judicial officers is immaterial. Howsoever an influencial person may be, I am sure one cannot influence a judicial officer, in imparting justice. 8. It is to be noted that the petitioner is a lady and the dispute is with her husband. Her husband and family members living at Sironj, are said to be influencial persons. The petitioner has put a grievance that there is danger to her life if she is compelled to go to Sironj any more and she will not be able to produce her witnesses there. Her husband and family members living at Sironj, are said to be influencial persons. The petitioner has put a grievance that there is danger to her life if she is compelled to go to Sironj any more and she will not be able to produce her witnesses there. On the other hand, the opposite parties alleged that the petitioner's brothers are influencial persons and they may influence judicial officers at Datia. Sironj is also within the territorial jurisdiction of this High Court. Datia is native place of the petitioner. Since there are reasonable apprehensions in the mind of the petitioner and also as evident from the circumstances, in view of the nature of the litigation and bad blood generated between the parties, it is expedient that the interest of both the parties be protected and convenience of both the parties has to be taken into consideration. 9. Datia is about 100 k.ms. from Gwalior. Sironj is about 235 K.Ms. from Gwalior is a place convenient to both the parties. Some of the opposite parties are living at Delhi, some are said to be in service elsewhere. Therefore, in either view of the matter Gwalior will be most convenient to both the parties and the Court at Gwalior will be in a position to give a fair trial of this case. As such, I am convinced that this case must be transferred to a Court at Gwalior for its fair trial and also for the convenience of both the parties. 10. Therefore, this petition is allowed. It is directed that Criminal Case No. 266 of 1994 rending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sironj stands transferred to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior, who shall try this case himself, according to law. After receiving the record of the aforesaid criminal case, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior shall fix a date in the case for further trial which shall be notified to the parties concerned.