If you and your spouse, along with your children, now live in entirely different states, understanding which specific city genuinely has jurisdiction to hear your divorce case is genuinely important, given the multiple potential connecting factors this situation presents.

Under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, jurisdiction for filing a divorce petition is established based on several specific and alternative connecting factors, meaning you genuinely have a choice among several potentially appropriate courts, rather than there being only one single, mandatory location.

The first connecting factor is the place where the marriage was solemnised, meaning the Family Court in the specific city or district where your wedding ceremony was performed has jurisdiction, regardless of where either party currently resides, and this remains a valid option even if neither of you currently lives anywhere near this specific location.

The second connecting factor is the place where the respondent, meaning the party against whom the petition is being filed, currently resides, meaning if you are filing against your spouse, the specific city where your spouse currently lives would have jurisdiction, and this is often a genuinely convenient option for the petitioner since it ensures the respondent can properly and easily participate in proceedings taking place in their own current location.

The third connecting factor is the place where the parties last resided together, meaning if you and your spouse shared a common residence at some point before your current separate residences in different states, the specific city where this last shared residence was located also has valid jurisdiction, regardless of where either of you has since moved.

The fourth connecting factor, specifically relevant and often genuinely important where a wife is the petitioner, is the place where the wife is currently residing at the time of filing, since this specific option was added to provide genuinely meaningful protection and convenience for wives, recognising the practical and social realities that often make it genuinely difficult for a wife to travel to a distant location to pursue matrimonial litigation.

Given these multiple available options, if you are the wife filing for divorce, you can choose to file in the city where you currently reside, even if this differs from where your husband now lives, where your marriage was solemnised, or where you last lived together, providing you with genuine flexibility and convenience in selecting an appropriate and accessible forum.

If you are the husband, you do not have this same specific "current residence of the petitioner" option available to you under the Act, meaning your available choices would be limited to where the marriage was solemnised, where the respondent (your wife) currently resides, or where you last resided together, and it is worth understanding this specific asymmetry reflects the legislature's particular intent to provide additional accessibility protection specifically for wives given the broader social context this provision was designed to address.

Given your children currently residing in a specific state, it is worth understanding that while the children's own current location is not itself an independent jurisdictional factor under Section 19 specifically for the divorce petition itself, this consideration can become genuinely relevant to any related custody proceedings, and it is worth discussing with your advocate whether pursuing your divorce and any related custody matters in the specific location most convenient given your children's current circumstances represents your best strategic option, given the multiple valid choices available to you.

If you file in one of these valid jurisdictions, but the opposing party believes a different location would be considerably more convenient or appropriate given their own specific circumstances, they retain the right to seek transfer of the case, as discussed extensively in relation to transfer petitions and the wife's convenience principle, meaning your initial choice of jurisdiction, while valid, remains subject to this possibility of a subsequent transfer application if genuinely warranted.

Given how many potentially valid jurisdictional options are genuinely available to you given this specific multi-state living situation, it is worth carefully considering which specific location genuinely best serves your practical needs and strategic interests before filing. You can reach out via Aapka Legal Advice for guidance on properly assessing which specific city offers the most advantageous and appropriate jurisdiction for your particular divorce case.

You can review Top Divorce Lawyers in India | Aapka Legal Advice for relevant experience handling multi-state jurisdictional matters.

Many people find real value in obtaining an independent, experienced perspective from the panel of retired judges available through certain legal consultation platforms.

If formal legal representation is required, engaging an experienced advocate will ensure your case is filed in the most appropriate and strategically advantageous jurisdiction.

In summary, when spouses and children now live in different states, jurisdiction for the divorce case under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can properly be established in the city where the marriage was solemnised, where the respondent currently resides, where the parties last resided together, or, specifically where the wife is the petitioner, where she currently resides, providing multiple valid options worth carefully considering based on your specific practical needs and strategic interests, given that this initial choice remains subject to a potential subsequent transfer application if the opposing party can demonstrate genuine hardship or convenience considerations.