SC seeks Shami’s response on wife’s plea to transfer domestic violence cases

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday issued a formal notice to Indian fast bowler Mohammed Shami after his estranged wife, Hasin Jahan, filed fresh petitions seeking the transfer of multiple legal proceedings, including her maintenance plea and a domestic violence case, from courts in West Bengal to Delhi, where she now resides with their daughter.

A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan took up the transfer applications and directed that Shami and other respondents, including family members named in the proceedings, respond within four weeks. The matter is expected to be listed for hearing after the replies are filed.

Jahan’s move marks a new legal front in the long-running and high-profile dispute between the former couple, unfolding in multiple courts over several years.

She has told the Supreme Court that attending proceedings in West Bengal, where earlier criminal and civil cases were filed, would cause “grave prejudice” to her and her minor daughter, who is pursuing education in the national capital.

What the transfer plea says

In her transfer petition, Jahan, represented by advocates including Deepak Prakash and Sriram Parakkat, asserted that she has shifted her residence to Delhi to secure her daughter’s “holistic growth and development” at a school in the city.

She argued that compelling her to travel roughly 1,500 km to Kolkata for court hearings would impose “severe inconvenience” and financial hardship, especially as she claims to have no independent income and is entirely dependent on maintenance currently paid by Shami.

Jahan also noted that Shami frequently travels for cricket matches and related commitments and therefore has the resources and logistical ability to contest the cases in Delhi.

She pointed out that Shami’s family resides in Uttar Pradesh, closer to Delhi compared with Kolkata, bolstering her plea for a shift.

Background of the dispute

The legal battle between Shami and Jahan has a long history. In 2018, Jahan lodged a complaint at the Jadavpur Police Station in Kolkata, alleging severe physical and mental cruelty by Shami and his family members.

An FIR was registered, and subsequent proceedings included charges under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code related to cruelty and assault.

Following the FIR, Jahan filed applications under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking interim maintenance for herself and her daughter.

Initial orders from the trial court directed Shami to pay modest amounts in maintenance, but the case intensified over time.

Maintenance tussle and past orders

In July 2025, the Calcutta High Court increased the interim maintenance to ₹4 lakh per month, ₹1.5 lakh for Jahan, and ₹2.5 lakh for her daughter, pending disposal of the domestic violence case.

The High Court observed that the husband’s income and financial disclosures indicated his capacity to pay a higher amount.

Undeterred, Jahan approached the Supreme Court later in 2025, challenging the High Court’s maintenance order as insufficient and seeking an enhanced monthly maintenance of ₹10 lakh for herself and her child.

The apex court issued notice in that matter in November 2025, but Shami’s response is yet to be filed. In her current transfer plea, Jahan reiterated that the existing maintenance is not proportional to Shami’s financial standing.

She added that he has declared a gross monthly expenditure reportedly exceeding ₹1.08 crore and a net worth estimated at around ₹500 crore in court filings, while she remains without independent earning capacity.

Legal implications and next steps

The Supreme Court’s notice on the transfer applications signals the court’s willingness to examine logistical and substantive fairness in litigation involving custodial, financial, and personal welfare aspects.

Transfer petitions are assessed on factors like convenience, hardship, and the ends of justice, especially in cases involving minor children. The apex court will take up the matter after the respondents file their replies, likely shaping the course of both the transfer applications and the ongoing maintenance enhancement plea.