Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 512 (AP)

U. Karuna v. Adapa Subrahmanyam

2006-04-12

P.S.NARAYANA

body2006
ORDER Heard the Counsel. 2. Smt. Chaya Devi, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner/accused had narrated several of the factual details and would contend that one Rajasekhar is behind this litigation and a similar case filed by the said Rajasekhar C.C. No. 239/2002 is pending of the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, West & South, Ranga Reddy District and in the light of the facts and circumstances C.C. No. 752/2002 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Avanigadda, Krishna District also be transferred to Judicial First Class Magistrate, West & South, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar preferably to be tried along with C.C. No. 239/2002. 3. Per contra Sri P. Nagender Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the 1st respondent would maintain that the 1st respondent, Adapa Subrahmanyam has nothing to do with the said Rajasekhar and merely because certain allegations are made as against a non-party to C.C. No. 752/2002 this cannot be made a ground to transfer the matter as prayed for by the petitioner. 4. Several of the factual details which had been narrated need not be considered in elaboration for the purpose of deciding this transfer application. The petitioner/accused in C.C. No. 752/2002 is a lady. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Apex Court in Neelam Kanwar v. Devinder Singh Kanwar 2001 (1) Crimes 18 (SC) wherein the Apex Court while dealing with a transfer petition under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 where a petition for transfer of complaint under Section 500 IPC was filed by the father of the 1st respondent therein in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh to the Court at Mumbai, the petitioner being a lady and the 1st respondent being a male, it was held that convenience - wise where the lady was residing would be preferred unless special reasons were shown to not to do so and accordingly the criminal complaint was ordered to be transferred from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mumbai. Reliance also was placed on Susheela B.S. v. Maruthi Ferto Chemicals Limited 2002 Crl.L.J. 2865 (Kar.) wherein the learned Judge of Karnataka High Court while dealing with the transfer of a case under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in relation to an offence of dishonour of cheque held that the accused/petitioner is a lady seeking transfer of case on the ground that she is suffering from sickness and her husband having undergone. Bye - pass surgery is not in a position to accompany her to the place of trial situated 500 K.Ms. away from their residence and further inasmuch as no prejudice would be caused to the complainant and as both the courts have concurrent jurisdiction to try the case the application praying for transfer was allowed. 5. In the present case it is no doubt true that several allegations were made as against one Rajasekhar who is said to be the complainant in C.C. No. 239/2002 and who is a non-party as far as C.C. No. 752/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Avanigadda, Krishna District is concerned. It is stated that the said Rajasekhar is a resident of Koduru which is 10 K.Ms. away from Avanigadda and his entire studies were completed at Avanigadda where the 1st respondent herein Adapa Subrahmanyam is residing. It was also stated by the petitioner that her son is aged 14 years and is suffering with Kidney problem and inasmuch as both the Kidneys failed her husband's Kidney was transplanted to her son and both are taking treatment and the petitioner alone has to look after her husband and her son as well. It was also stated that the petitioner has no relatives or friends at Avanigadda which is an unknown place and she is apprehending danger to her life to go and attend the case in C.C. No. 752/2002 at Avanigadda which is more than 400 K.Ms. from Hyderabad. It was also further specifically stated that S. Rajasekhar is behind this litigation. 6. This Court is not inclined to express any opinion about several of the factual details which had been narrated and it is needless to say that these are all aspects which may have to be gone into at the appropriate state. from Hyderabad. It was also further specifically stated that S. Rajasekhar is behind this litigation. 6. This Court is not inclined to express any opinion about several of the factual details which had been narrated and it is needless to say that these are all aspects which may have to be gone into at the appropriate state. Be that as it may, taking the over all facts and circumstances into consideration, irrespective of the defence which is being put forth by the petitioner and without expressing any opinion in relation thereto, prima facie, taking the allegations made in the affidavit filed in support of the present Transfer application, in the light of the peculiar facts of the case, this Court is inclined to withdraw C.C. No. 752/2002 on the file of Additional Judicial Fist Class Magistrate, Avanigadda, Krishna District and transfer the same to the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, West & South, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, West & South, Ranga Reddy District is re-designated as IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad. Hence, it is needless to say that C.C. No. 752/2002 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Avanigadda, Krishna District be transferred to IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad to be tried and disposed of in accordance with law. 7. The Transfer Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is ordered accordingly.