MALAY KUMAR BASU, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application under S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. praying for transfer of the maintenance case being M. R. Case No. 790-M/97 from the Court of the learned S. D. J. M. , Malda to any other Court in West Bengal. ( 2 ) THE petition has been filed by, Pijush Banerjee, who is the opposite party in the aforementioned maintenance case which is pending in the Court of the learned S. D. J. M. , Malda at this moment. Ground on which the petition is filed is that the petitioner husband went to Malda district to attend the said Court in connection with the hearing of the said matter on 11/11/1997 when some unknown persons threatened him with dire consequences asking him to quit Malda immediately, otherwise he would have to face the consequences. It is further alleged that those people also assaulted the petitioner and on being so intimidated, the petitioner left Malda at once after informing the incident to his lawyer there. The petition has been contested and opposed by the opposite party wife. ( 3 ) UNDER S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. the transfer of a case from one Court to another can be directed or effected when it appears to the High Court that a fair and impartial enquiry or trial cannot be had in any criminal Court subordinate to it or that some question of law of unusual degree is likely to order or 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. Therefore, it goes without saying that in order to deal with such a petition this Court is to remain confined within this compass and cannot go beyond this and it cannot take any other ground outside what has been provided in these clauses to be sufficient for the purpose of passing an order allowing such a petition under this section. ( 4 ) IN the present case, the ground is that the petitioner being the husband, had to face some resistance "presumably" from the side of the wife when he went to the Court at Malda to attend it in connection with the hearing of the impugned case. ( 4 ) IN the present case, the ground is that the petitioner being the husband, had to face some resistance "presumably" from the side of the wife when he went to the Court at Malda to attend it in connection with the hearing of the impugned case. In the first place, such a ground is not mentioned in the provisions of S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. as one that can prompt a Court of law a petition for transfer. Secondly, even if it is assumed for the sake of argument that such a ground also will do in such a matter, even then the story which has been made out by the petitioner-husband suffers from a number of loopholes. In the first place, the alleged threatening took place on 11/11/1997 but from the copy of the complaint lodged before the Battala P. S. , it appears that it was lodged on 22/11/1997. The petitioner fails to give any satisfactory explanation as to what prevented him from lodging such a complaint to Battala P. S. immediately after such an alleged occurrence took place and what made him file such a complaint after long 12 days. This renders such a complaint as one which is susceptive of being manufactured for the purpose of the application for transfer. Secondly, it is also not explained why the complaint instead of being lodged before the Malda Police was lodged at Battala P. S. at Calcutta. The place of occurrence was Malda and usually such a complaint ought to have lodged with the Malda Police. ( 5 ) IT is submitted by Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the husband was so afraid on being threatened that he rushed back to Calcutta then and there and did not get any time or had not the right mind or mood to go to the Malda police. But it is not understood neither it is explained by Mr. Mukherjee as to what prevented the petitioner from lodging a complaint like this with the Malda police on the next date of hearing i. e. 27/12/1998, when he admittedly had been to Malda Court again and regarding which occasion he does not level any complaint of similar threat being given to him. Mukherjee as to what prevented the petitioner from lodging a complaint like this with the Malda police on the next date of hearing i. e. 27/12/1998, when he admittedly had been to Malda Court again and regarding which occasion he does not level any complaint of similar threat being given to him. Thirdly, on careful perusal of the contents of the complaint dated 22/11/1997 I find that it is totally vague, i. e. , no specific allegation as to what threat was given to him. It is simply stated that they threatened with drastic consequences. Moreover, in the revisional application it is in unambiguous terms stated that those people also assaulted the petitioner. But curiously enough, no such allegation is levelled in the complaint dated 22nd November, 1997 lodged before the Battala P. S. Such discrepancies and conflicting statements only highlight the falsity of such claim. In this connection, the contention of Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate for the opposite party, cannot be brushed aside that all these facts and circumstances only give rise to the suspicion that such a complaint and such a story were created for the purpose of this application. ( 6 ) BE that as it may, as I have pointed out at the very outset, the grounds which are mentioned under S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. to be taken for the purpose of filing a petition for transfer do not cover a ground like the present one namely, threat given by some people with dire consequences. This is a matter which constitutes a law and order problem and is the concern of and should be addressed to the local administration, more particularly, the police force, and if anything untoward really takes place, then that is the responsibility of that branch of administration of the State and if, at any rate, it cannot form a ground on which a Court can be competent to transfer a case from one District Court to another in disregard of the letter and spirit of the provisions of S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. discussed above. P. C. discussed above. To allow a petition like this on such a ground, even assuming that it has been proved to be true will set the dangerous trend of giving the impression to the litigant public at large that the administrative machinery is so callous that it cannot control even a small number of unruly elements or cannot tackle such a few trifling and stray instances of acts of indiscipline so that a litigant party cannot safely attend the Court of law and as a result his litigation has to be transferred to the Court of another place. ( 7 ) THUS, the grounds which has been made out in the application for transfer under S. 407 of the Cr. P. C. do not impress me. It is the established principle that the natural jurisdiction of a Court should not be disturbed normally and unless some extreme and extraordinary circumstances as spelt out under that Section of the law are proved to exist, the provisions of this section cannot be resorted to and that the discretion given under the said section should be exercised sparingly in the justifying cases only. ( 8 ) IN view of the entire discussion made above, I do not find any merit in the application under consideration and the petition be dismissed. ( 9 ) LET urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocates for both parties within seven days from the date of putting the requisites. Petition dismissed