IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA1« TRANSFERCRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7 OF 2025 Between: 1. Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Oil Mills Pvt Ltd, Corporate Office and Factory, Survey No. 599-600, Post Thatipally Village, Jagityala Mandal, Karimnagar District, PIN.505 327, Rep. by Ex-Managing Director, Ranga Ashok (As per Orders of Company Tribunal dated 13-05-2021) 2. Sri Ranga Ashok, Ex -Managing Director, Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Oil Mills Pvt. Ltd Corporate Office and Factory, Survey No. 599-600, Post Thatipally VNIager Jagityala Mandal, Karimnagar District, PIN.505 327 ...Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ... Respondent No.2/State 2. Sri Satyanarayana Poultries, Vemulapalli Represented by its Managing Partner, Sri Chirla Ramana, S/o. Satayanaryana Reddy, aged about 43 Years, Resident of Athamuru, Mandapeta Mandal, East Godavari District. ...Respondent No.1/Complainant Petition under Section 447 of BNSS, 2023 praying that the High Court may be pleased to withdraw C.C.No.241 of 2015 on the file of the . Court Of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Anaparthi, East Godavari District and transfer the same to any other equivalent court situated at Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District for trail and dispose of. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 447 (6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including presence of the petitioner in C.C.No.241 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Anaparthi, East Godavari District including docket order dated 27-01-2025 pending disposal of the above TR. CRL. Petition in this Hon’ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. Rama Murty P V S A Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Sri N. Siva Reddy The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.07 of 2025 ORDER: The petitioners herein have filed the present petition under Section 447 of B.N.S.S., Act seeking to withdraw C.C.No.241 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Anaparthi, East Godavari District and transfer the same to any other equivalent Court situated at Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. 2, The case of the petitioner as per his affidavit in brief is as follows; I. The petitioners had filed several applications before the trial Court and the same were dismissed by the trial Court without assigning any reasons and the petitioners are unable to question the said dismissal of the applications, instead of pursing the dismissal of the applications, the petitioners are making their efforts in making fresh applications. II. The material on record reveals that the petitioners had filed the various petitions under Section 428 of Cr.P.C., vide Crl.P.No.6101 of 2019, Crl.R.C.No.1077 of 2019, Crl.P.No.6280 of 2019, Crl.P.No.2321 of 2023, Crl.P.No.58 of 2020 and Crl.P.No.1902 of 2023, before this Court, wherein 1> 2 this Court had dismissed the aforesaid petitions. It is relevant to say that the petitioners herein had filed Tr.Crl.M.P.No.3 of 2023, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and the was dismissed on merits by the learned trial Judge 07.08.2023. But, the said dismissal order dated 07.08.2023, was not challenged by the petitioners till 27.01.2025, which date the present Transfer Criminal Petition is filed before this Court. Therefore, it seems that the petitioners had kept quite from the Month of August, 2023 to till the end of the Month of January, 2025, without invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 407 of Criminal Procedure Code. The material placed by the respondent No.2 clearly proves that the petitioners herein used to file one after another petitions and as such the proceedings in the main case are stalled till the year 2025. same on on 3. Heard Sri Rama Murthy P.V.S.A., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel representing respondent No.2 and perused the record. 4. During the course of the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner had placed a reliance on the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ketan Kantilal Seth Vs. The State of 3 Gujarat, wherein the facts of the said case are related to a miscellaneous application said to have been filed by seeking modification/recall of the order dated 09,09.2022, passed by the Hon ble Apex Court in Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos.333 & 348 of 2021. The facts of the aforesaid case law are different to that of the facts in the present Transfer Criminal Petition. 5. The law is well settled that ‘the apprehension of not getting a fair and impartial enquiry or trial is required to be reasonable and not imaginary, based upon conjunctures and surmises. ” The Apex Court in a case of Captain Amarinder Singh vs Parkash Singh Badal & Ors ^ held as follows: 6. 12. mere allegations that there is apprehension that justice will not be done in a given case does not suffice. In other words, the court has further to see whether apprehension alleged is reasonable or not. The apprehension must not only be entertained but must appear to the court to be a reasonable apprehension.” 7. In the case on hand, learned counsel appearing for both sides on record had represented that the entire trial in the criminal case has already been completed and the learned trial Judge had posted the case to 10.02.2025, for Judgment. pronouncement of the " (20<SS)& SCC 260 4 8. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that, at this stage, it is not desirable to consider the request of the petitioner seeking transfer of C.C.No.241 of 2015, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Anaparthi, East Godavari District to any other equivalent Court situated at Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the trial Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the criminal case in C.C.No.241 of 2015 instituted by the complainant/respondent No.2 herein. But, as stated supra, as the matter has already been posted for pronouncement of Judgment by the learned trial Judge the learned trial Judge to decide the said issue as per law. it is for 9. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioner and this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case to transfer the case in C.C.No.241 of 2015, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Anaparthi, East Godavari District Court situated at Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari to any other District and as such, the present Transfer Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit. lo: With the above observations, the Transfer Criminal Petition i dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. IS \ 5 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VENUGOPALA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anaparthi, East Godavari District. One CC to Sri. Rama Murty P.V.S.A., Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri. N Siva Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT Three CD Copies 2. 3. 4. 5. Stu sree HIGH COURT DATED:07/02/2025 ORDER TRCRLP.No.7 of 2025 g 06MAR20?5 ^ ^ . Current Section ★ y*- DISMISSING THE TR.CRLP WITHOUT COSTS