X ' IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 111 OF 2024 Between: Gorla Ravi Nadiu, S/o. Late Yemkanaidu, Aged 46 years, Occ. Business, R/o.Haripuram Village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District, A.P. ...Petitioner AND 1. Pulakala Gavarayya, S/o. PulakalaJagannadham, Aged 48 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Old Colony, Kaviti Village and Mandal, Srikakulam District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court Amaravathi,Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondents Petition under the Section 447 of BNSS Cr.P.C., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to allow the Tr.CrIp by setting aside the order dt. 02-11- 2024 passed in Tr.Crl.M.P.No.376 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge and consequently pleased to grant direction to withdraw C.C.No.130 of 2024 from the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram and to transfer the same to the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Sompeta. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C. No. 130 of 2024 from the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, pending disposal of the present Transfer Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Venkateswarlu Sanisetty, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of Respondent No.2 and of Sri Viswanath N., Advocate for Respondent No.1 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VENKATESWARLU SANISETTY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI VISWANATH N Counsel for the Respondent No.2: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER:- THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.111 of 2024 ORDER: The petitioner herein filed the present petition under Section 447 of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, seeking to set aside the order dated 02.11.2024, passed in Tr.Crl.M.P.No.376 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam and consequently pleased to withdraw the C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, and transfer the same to the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta, for trial. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: The petitioner herein pleaded that the respondent No.1 filed C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against the petitioner herein and the same is pending for trial. The petitioner further pleaded that, he was suffering with chronic heart related problem (blood pumping issue) and the doctors advised him not to travel much and take rest. The petitioner is residing at Haripuram Village, the distance between Haripuram and Ichapuram is more than 50 Kms, and he further pleaded that as he was suffering with heart disease, he is unable to travel from Haripuram to Ichapuram and that the petitioner was constrained to file the present Transfer Criminal Petition. 2. I. I 2 \ VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.lllof2024 i 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for both sides. I The material on record prima facie shows that, the petitioner 4. herein is the accused in C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, and he is residing at Haripuram Village, Mandasa Mandal, which IS neighbouring place of Ichapuram. The material on record further reveals that the respondent No.1 herein/complainant filed his chief counter affidavit as PW.1 and the matter has been coming for cross-examination of PW.1. At this stage, the petitioner has approached the learned Principal District Judge, Srikakulam and filed Tr.Crl.M.P.No.376 of 2024 seeking to withdraw the C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, and transfer the same to the 5. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta. 6. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, on appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record dismissed the Tr.Crl.M.P.No.376 of 2024 vide order dated 02.11.2024. Hence, the petitioner herein approached this Court for seeking to withdraw the C.C.No.130 of 2024 from the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, and transfer the same to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta. The ground urged by the petitioner herein is that, he has been suffering with heart disease and hyper tension and also with Diabetic 7. 3 VGKR, J Tr.CrI.P.No.lllof 2024 issues. But the fact remains that the petitioner has not been filed any documentary proof to show that he has underwent in patient treatment for his heart disease. In fact, the certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon of King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam, does not shows that the petitioner underwent to heart surgery. 8. It is well settled that while considering the transfer of a Criminal Case, the transfer of the case has to be accepted in exceptional cases. considering the fact that the transfers may cast 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 be 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 has to be exercised cautiously and In exceptional situations, where it becomes necessary to do so to provide credibility to the trial. Some of the broad factors which could be kept in mind while 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 ‘ 2011(1)see 307 4 VGKR, J Tr.Crl.P.No.lllof2024 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 caused to the accused, the complainant/the prosecution and the witnesses, besides the burden to be borne by the State 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 of justice. ” 9. The fact remains that both the competent Courts i.e., at Ichapuram and Sompeta are situated within a distance of 50 Kms. As stated supra. no proof has been filed by the petitioner herein to show that he has undergone for heart surgery. Therefore, I do not find any valid grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner herein seeking to withdraw the C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, and transfer the same to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.2/State represented that they have 5 VGKR, J Tr.CrI.P.No.lllof 2024 no objection to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioner herein before the trial Court. However, considering the representation made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.2/State, if the personal appearance of the petitioner herein i.e., accused in C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, has been dispensed with, “except on the days when his personal appearance is required as per law”, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents. 10. With the above observations, the Transfer Criminal Petition is disposed of and the personal appearance of the petitioner herein i.e.. accused in C.C.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram, has been dispensed with “except on the days when his personal appearance is required as per law”, before the said Court till the disposal of the said case. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam District. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta One CC to Sri. Venkateswarlu Sanisetty Advocate [OPUC] 2. 3. 4. 5. One CC to Sri. Viswanath N., Advocate [OPUO 6. Two CCs to The Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies sree HIGH COURT \ i DATED;21/01/2025 ORDER TRCRLP.No.111 of 2024 .,g 0 5 FEB 2025 m i Os Current Section ^SPA.yCM'^S^ DISPOSING OF THE TR.CRL.P. WITHOUT COSTS