APHC010074342026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 31/2026 Between: 1. KAVALA SATYANARAYANA, S/O. K. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,OCCUPATION CAR MECHANIC, R/O.1-30, CHINNA GUDI VEEDHI, VALLURU VILLAGE,GANAPAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, PIN - 534197. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGHCOURT OF A.P., AMARAVATHI, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,NARASAPU TOWN POLICE STATION, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRAPRADESH. 2. M V V JAGAN MOHAN RAO, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWNR/O. NARSAPUR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): pleased to transfer the SC No.73 of 2022 pending on the file of Hon'ble Assistant Sessions Judge, Narsapur,West Godavari District and to transfer the same to the Sessions court in Vijayawada city and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 2 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay all further proceedings in SC No.73 of 2022 pending on the file of Hon'ble Assistant Sessions Judge, Narsapur,West Godavari District, to the Sessions court in Vijayawada city, pending disposal of the above Tr.CrI.P pending disposal of the above transfer criminal petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D TARAKA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.31 of 2026 ORDER: Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, proof of service Memo has been field before the Registry on 02.03.2026 vide U.S.R.No.26464 of 2026, along with the Postal Track Consignment Sheet downloaded from the Postal Department Website and the same has been placed on record. As per the Postal Track Consignment Sheet, the registered notice sent to the respondent and the same was served on 24.02.2026. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent. Therefore, „service held sufficient‟. 2. The petitioner/wife herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, „the C.P.C.‟), seeking to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, on the file of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sattenapalli, and transfer the same to the file of learned Judge, Additional Family Court-XIV Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, for trial and disposal. 3. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: i. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent/husband, and their marriage was solemnized on 22.05.2022 at Dwaraka Tirumala Sri Venkateswara Swamy 4 Temple Kalyana Mandapam, as per Hindu Marriage customs and rituals. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents‟ house at Vijayawada. The petitioner further pleaded that she filed F.C.O.P.(MC) No.593 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada, seeking maintenance, and she lodged a complaint vide C.C. No.4841 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada, and she also filed D.V.C. No.286 of 2024 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada, and the same are pending for adjudication. ii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, seeking for dissolution of the marriage under Section 13(1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition. 5 4. Heard Sri K.R.Raghavendra Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Perused the material available on record. 6. The material on record prima facie shows that, in view of the matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents‟ house at Vijayawada and depending upon the mercy of her parents. The material on record further discloses that the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition against the petitioner/wife vide H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, seeking for dissolution of the marriage under Section 13(1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner also got filed F.C.O.P.(MC)No.593 of 2024, on the file of learned Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada, seeking maintenance and C.C.No.4841 of 2024, on the file of learned II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada and D.V.C.No.286 of 2024, on the file of learned I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada and the same are pending for adjudication 7. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER HEERA1, held by considering the fact that “if a wife does not have sufficient funds to visit the place where the divorce petition is 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 6 filed by her husband, then the transfer petition filed by the wife may be allowed.” 8. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha2 held as follows: “9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.” 9. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case laws that, in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration rather than the inconvenience of the husband and therefore, I am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, to the file of learned 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 7 Judge, Additional Family Court-cum-XIV Additional District Judge at Vijayawada. 10. In the result, the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed, and H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned Judge, Additional Family Court-cum-XIV Additional District Judge at Vijayawada. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.157 of 2023, to the file of learned Judge, Additional Family Court-cum-XIV Additional District Judge at Vijayawada, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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. _______________________________ JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 12.03.2026 MH 8 9 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO 2 TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.31 of 2026 Date: 12.03.2026 MH