APHC010335122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.45 of 2025 Between: 1. Kbtapati Bindu Madhavi, W/o. Sai Krishna Housewife, aged about 36 years, Occ; R/o. D. No. 19-3-2/97, F^^nigunta Road, Srinivasapuram, Tirupati, A.P. Behind Diamond Collection 2. Kpnda Susheela, W/o. Andhra Kesari, aged about 59 Housewife, R/o. H. No. 2-29, Kotha Cherlopalli, Chittoor District 3. Konda Chandrasekhar, S/o. Andhra Kesari, Aged about 38 Private, R/o. D.No. 19-3-2/97, Behind Diamond Collection Road, Renigunta Road, Srinivasapuram, Tirupati, A.P. 4. Konda Narendranath, S/o. Andhra Kesari, Aged about 39 Pi^ivate, R/o. H. No. 2-29, Kotha Cherlopalli, Chittoor District. 5. Minampati Prasad, S/o. Venkaiah, Aged about 51 R/6. D.No.19-3-2/97, Behind Diamond Collection, Srinivasapuram, Tirupati, A.P. years, Occ; A.P. years, Occ: Renigunta years, Occ: A.P. years, Occ: Private, Renigunta Road, 6. Payuluri Ramanaidu, S/o. Vengaiah, Aged about 52 R/p. D.No. 8-216, Buggaveedhi, Renigunta, Tirupati, A.P. years, Occ: Private, 7. Yenugupati Nageswara Rao, S/o. Chandraiah, Aged about 59 Occ: Private, R/o. D.No. 19-3-2/97 Renigunta Road, Srinivasapuram, Tirupati, A.P. years. Behind Diamond Collection ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Through SHO, Narasaraopet Police Station, Palnadu District. High Court of I Town 2. Kotapati Tirupatamma, W/o. late Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged about 55 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. D.No. 11-4-7/1, 0pp. to Bhasyam Public School, Ramireddipet, Narasaraopet Town, Palnadu District. ...RESPONDENTS of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flied in support of the petition, the Hffih Court may be pleased to withdraw C.C. No. 511 of 2024 in the Hon’ble 1^' Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Narasaraopet, and transfer the same to the Hon'ble IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicia l First Class Magistrate, Tirupati, Chittoor District. lA NO: 1 OF Transfer Criminal Petition filed under Section 447 Petition under Section 447(6) of BNSS (under Section 407(6) of Cr P C) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the fficludTno h P^ceelgs and 1 “ ASona^ appearance Of the petitioner C.C. No.511 of 2024 in the Hon'ble 1 Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Narasaraopet, Guntur District. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for Respondent No.1 : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for Respondent No.2 : SRI MD SALEEM The Court made the following ORDER ; / THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.45 of 2025 ORDERS The petitioners herein have filed the present petition under Section 447 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (for ‘short the B N.S.S.’) Act, 2023, seeking for withdrawal of C.C.No.511 of 2024 or» the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet P^lnadu District and transfer the same to the IV Additional Junior cil/il Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati, Chittoor District, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioners in brief is as follows; The petitioner No.1 is the legally wedded wife of the son of respondent No.2 and their marriage was performed on 12.12.2013, at Narasaroapeta, as per the Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. During their wedlock period, the petitioner No.1/wife and the son of respondent No.2/husband were blessed with two (2) children aged about 10 (& 4 years respectively. Later, in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the petitioner No.1/wife has been residing separately along with her two children at her parents’ house at Tirupati. The petitioner No.1/wife further pleaded that in view of 2 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 the harassment made by the respondent No.2/husband the petitioner/wife lodged a complaint, against the respondent No.2/husband and his family members, dated 28.06.2022, in Crime No.50 of 2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323 & 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 before the Disha Mahila Police Station, Tirupati and the same was numbered as C.C.No.2053 of 2022 on the file of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati and she also filed a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.No.71 of 2022 on the file of the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati, Chittoor District and the said two (2) cases are pending for adjudication before the competent Courts at Tirupati. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the respondentNo.2/husband had lodged a complaint vide F.I.R.No.48 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 347, 386, 452 & 506 r/w 34 IPC against the petitioners and the same was numbered as C.C.No.511 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional 3 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, and the same is also pending for adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contended that the petitioner being a woman and also residing separately along with her children aged 10 & 4 years respectively at Tirupati, it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the case proceedings before the Court at Narasaraopet , which is situated at a distance of more than 400Kms from Tirupati to Narasaraopet without any male assistance and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband, seeking for withdrawal of C.C.No.511 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District and transfer the same to the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class Tirupati, Chittoor District. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of rebpondent No.1/State and Sri Md. Saleem, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 3. Perused the material available on record. 4. 4 X Tr.Crl.P.iVo.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 The material petitioner No. 1/wife/ac her two (2) children Crime No.50 Sections 498-A Prohibition Act. Tirupati and the °f ‘he IV Additional P'rst Class filed on record prima facie 9oes to show that, residing separately along has instituted *he offences the cused has been at Tirupati. She of 2022, for 223 & 506 ofl.p 1961, before with a Criminal Case punishable i.e. under 3&4ofthe Dowry ■C. and Sections '■ *he Disha Mahila Police Station, same numbered os C.C.No.2053 of 2022 on the file Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate had also offences of Tirupati. The son of respondentNo.2/husband a Criminal Case v/, punishable under Sections the petitioners F.I.R.No.48 2023 for the 247, 386, 452 & 506 r/w 34 |pc as C.C.No.5li against and the was file of the I Additional numbered Junior Civil Judge, of 2024 on the Marasaraopet. Further material available the on record goes to show that all the wi Witnesses residing in Narasaraopeta. are if was brought fo the notice respondents that, the of this Court personal been dispensed wi dated 05.12.2024. considering fhe transfer case has to be fact that the hy the learned counsel for the petitioners before Court i appearance of the fhe trial Court has with by this 'n f^uminal Petition No. 8828 of 2024, while of the considering the 7. It is well Criminal Case, settled that fhe transfer of a accepted in transfers exceptional cases. may 5 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 unnecessarily aspirations on the State Judiciary and the Prosecution Agency. The Apex Court in a case of Nahar Singh Yadav &Anr Vs Union of India &,ors^held as follows: “24. Thus, although no rigid and inflexible rule or test could laid down to decide whether or not power under Section 406 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised, it is manifest from a bare reading of sub-sections (2) and (3) of the said Section and on an analysis of the decisions of this Court that an order of transfer of trial is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because an interested party has expressed some apprehension about the proper conduct of a trial. This power h^s to be exercised cautiously and in exceptional situations, Viihere it becomes necessary to do so to provide credibility to tke trial. Some of the broad factors which could be kept in mind v^hile considering an application for transfer of the trial are: ^i) when it appears that the State machinery or prosecution is acting hand in glove with the accused, and there is likelihood of miscarriage of justice due to the lackadaisical attitude of the prosecution; (ii) when there is material to show that the accused may influence the prosecution witnesses or cause physical harm to the complainant; (Hi) comparative inconvenience and hardships likely to be paused to the accused, the complainant/the prosecution and the witnesses, besides the burden to be borne by the State ^201^ (1)see 307 6 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 1 Exchequer in making payment of travelling and other expenses of the official and non-official witnesses; (iv) a communally surcharged atmosphere, indicating some proof of inability of holding fair and impartial trial because of the accusations made and the nature of the crime committed by the accused; and (v) existence of some material from which it can be inferred that the some persons are so hostile that they are interfering or are likely to interfere either directly or indirectly with the course ofjustice.” The ground urged for seeking transfer of C.C.No.511 of 2024, is that the petitioners/accused are residing at Tirupati and they have to go all the way from Tirupati to Narasaraopet, which is at a distance of nearly 400 Kms. In the case on hand, as per the charge sheet filed by the Police, all the witnesses are residing at Narasaraopet and Vijayawada respectively. The law is well settled that in Transfer of Criminal Cases, the Court has to be consider the 8. convenience of the witnesses than that of the inconvenience caused to the accused. 9. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merits and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioners and I am of the considered view that, it is not a fit case to withdraw C.C.No.511 of 2024^ ^n the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, f / ; 7 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.45 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 Narasaraopet, Palnadu District and transfer the same to the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge-curh-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hirupati, Chittoor District and as such, the present Transfer Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits. 1b. With the above observations, the Transfer Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. SOI- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The 1®^ Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 2. The Station House Officer, Narasaraopet I Town Police Station, Palnadu District. 3. One CC to Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Md Saleem, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies TK TAC HIGH COURT DATE 0:20/08/2025 ORDER TRCRLP No.45 of 2025 ^ANDW^ g 17 SEP im ^ Current beciion ^4 69 DISMISSING THE TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION