Judgment Satish Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This petition had been filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for transfer of the proceedings of complaint case titled as "Jagdev Singh v. Surinder Kaur and others" pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mansa to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur. 2. The petitioner is stated to be an old man of 80 years and is a resident of Ferozepur. The daughter of the petitioner was married with Jagdev Singh in the year 2000, who is a resident of Budhlada, District Mansa. It has been alleged that at the time of marriage, the petitioner had given sufficient dowry articles to the respondent husband and his family members, but after the marriage, the respondent as well as his family members started harassing the daughter of the petitioner for bringing insufficient dowry and started maltreating her and subsequently she was turned out of her matrimonial home. 3. Thereafter, the daughter of the petitioner filed a petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur and the said petition is now pending there. Regarding this matrimonial dispute, three cases are going in the Court at Ferozepur i.e. Divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, case pertaining to FIR under Sections 406/498-A IPC and an application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 4. During the pendency of the aforesaid three cases, the husband has filed the aforesaid complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mansa in which he has alleged that the accused persons in connivance with each other and by misrepresenting have shown wrong photostat copy of the date of birth of his wife and forged photostat copy of her B.Ed. Certificate and conducted the marriage of accused No. 1 whereas she had not obtained any B.Ed. Degree from the Punjabi University, and got issued wrong matrimonial advertisement by showing wrong qualification and by giving wrong age and as such cheated and deceived the complainant. In the said complaint, the petitioner has been summoned alongwith his daughter etc. It has been stated in this petition that the petitioner is an old man and it is difficult for him to contest the aforesaid case at Mansa which is about 200 Kms. from Ferozepur. 5. In the said complaint, the petitioner has been summoned alongwith his daughter etc. It has been stated in this petition that the petitioner is an old man and it is difficult for him to contest the aforesaid case at Mansa which is about 200 Kms. from Ferozepur. 5. I have heard the counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the petition as well as the reply filed by the respondent. 6. The respondent has objected the transfer of the aforesaid case to Ferozepur on the ground that the petitioner has not appeared before the Court at Mansa and filed the instant petition to avoid the execution of non-bailable warrants issued against him. It as been further stated that the offence was committed in the jurisdiction at Mansa, therefore, the case has to be tried by the same Court. It has been also stated that the respondent will have to attend the proceedings on each and every date at Ferozepur and it will cause great hardship to him. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the petition, I am of the opinion that this petition deserves to be allowed and the criminal complaint filed by the respondent husband should be tried at Ferozepur where already three cases going on. Keeping in view the age of the petitioner, who is 80 years old and the fact that the other family members including wife of the complainant are at present residing in Ferozepur where three cases are going on, I deem it appropriate to transfer this case also to Ferozepur. 8. Hence, this petition is allowed. However, it will be open for the respondent husband to move an application for personal exemption being complainant before the appropriate court. If any such application is filed, the same shall be considered by trial Court in accordance with law.