Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 49 (AP)

P. Sunil Kumar v. Kapil Chits Hyderabad Pvt Ltd

2023-01-04

A.V.RAVINDRA BABU

body2023
JUDGMENT A.V. Ravindra Babu, J. - This Transfer Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner, who is the accused in C.C.No.153 of 2018, on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ananthapuramu, with a prayer to transfer the same to the Court of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chottoor District. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the first respondent is running chits business in the name and style of 'M/s. Kapil Chits Hyderabad Pvt. Limited'. The petitioner joined as a subscriber in one of the chits and executed relevant documents. Later, he became successful bidder. But, the respondent falsely filed a cheque dishonour case against him. The petitioner married one Polakala Gunavathi in the year, 2005 and she and the petitioner were blessed with two female kids. On 21.09.2021 his wife died. The children of the petitioners are school going age. He is a Central Government employee. He is not able to get leave to go to Ananthapuramu Courts. Hence, the case may be transferred from the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ananthapuramu to the Court of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District. Hence, the petition. 3. Nobody appeared on behalf of first respondent in spite of service of notice. 4. Now, in deciding the Transfer Criminal Petition, the point that arises for consideration is whether the C.C.No.153 of 2018, pending on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ananthapuramu, is liable to be transferred to the Court of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District, as prayed for? Point:- 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend according to the averments in the petition. 6. As seen from the copy of C.C.No.153 of 2018, it is filed by the first respondent herein alleging dishonour of cheque. The complainant therein pleaded certain facts as if the petitioner herein joined as a subscriber, executed relevant documents, received the prize amount and issued the subject matter of the cheque for one of the installments of the amount due and when it was presented, it was dishonoured. 7. Now the contention of the petitioner is that though he is a Central Government employee, but he is not able to get leave, etc., and he has to take care of two children. 7. Now the contention of the petitioner is that though he is a Central Government employee, but he is not able to get leave, etc., and he has to take care of two children. It is to be noticed that invoking the jurisdiction of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate concerned, according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, the first respondent filed complaint pertaining to C.C.No.153 of 2018. It is not the case of the petitioner that the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ananthapuramu has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The petitioner's age is shown in the complaint in the Court below as that of 30 years. There is no dispute that he is claiming that he is the Central Government employee. It is to be noticed that the institution and taking cognizance and trying a particular Calendar Case is well regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code. Now on account of personal inconvenience, the petitioner sought for transfer. The grounds pleaded by the petitioner are not sufficient to grant relief. 8. Apart from this, this Court is surprised to learn that the prayer of the petitioner is to get the transfer of the Calendar Case in C.C.No.153 of 2018 to a specific Court i.e., V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District, though there are number of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Courts located at Tirupati. So, the petitioner miserably failed to make out a case as to why he sought for transfer of Calendar Case only to the Court of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, though several Criminal Courts are located therein. Even otherwise, on facts the petitioner miserably failed to make out a case so as to get the relief. Hence, I see no reason to grant the relief. 9. In the result, the Criminal Transfer Petition is dismissed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.