APHC010098492026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 35/2026 Between: Neelam Venkata Ramarao ...PETITIONER AND Neelam Vijayalakshmi and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NEELAM SANKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MADHU SUDANA SAI RAM ASADI 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.35 of 2026 ORDER: The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 447 of B.N.S.S., Act seeking to transfer M.C.No.01 of 2017, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala to the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Guntur, Guntur District. 2. The case of the petitioner is as follows: I. The petitioner herein is the husband of the respondent No.1/wife and their marriage has been solemnized on 29.08.2010. During their wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent No.1 were blessed with two sons. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the respondent No.1/wife is staying separately at her parents’ house at Vetapalem Village, Chirala Mandal, Bapatla District and the two minor sons were residing along with their father i.e., petitioner/husband at Guntur District. The petitioner contend that the respondent No.1 lodged a complaint against the petitioners before the Vetapalem Police Station, under Section 498-A IPC and under Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and after completion of investigation, the Police filed a charge sheet vide C.C.No.710 of 2016, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, and the same is transferred to Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, and the same is pending for adjudication. II. The petitioner further pleaded that to cause unnecessary inconvenience to him and his family members, the respondent No.1 had filed a Domestic Violence Case in D.V.C.No.04 of 2017, and a Maintenance Case in M.C.No.01 of 2017, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, a case in H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2019, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, and a suit in O.S.No.127 of 2019, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, and the same are pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent No.1 had also filed G.W.O.P.No.25 of 2017, on the file of the VII Additional District Judge, Ongole, seeking custody of the minor children from the petitioner and the same was dismissed on 17.12.2024, by the Court below. The petitioner further pleaded that since the date of transfer of the case in C.C.No.710 of 2016, from the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, to the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, the presiding officer is not allowing the petitioners herein to file their defence in the said case and is openly stating that “he will not allow the petitioner to file any of the documents on behalf of the petitioner.” III. The petitioner further pleaded that he is aged about 47 years and is suffering from diabetic health issues. He further pleaded that he is residing at Guntur along with his two minor sons and his parents and is unable to travel from Guntur to Chirala on each and every date of adjournment continuously in the Maintenance Case, Domestic Violence Case and in H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2019, which are pending before the competent Courts at Chirala. As such, the petitioner is constrained to file the present transfer criminal petition seeking to transfer M.C.No.01 of 2017, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala to the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. Heard Sri Neelam Shankara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.2/State and Sri Madhu Sudana Sai Ram Asadi, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. Perused the material available on record. 4. It was represented by the learned counsel appearing for both sides on record that enquiry in M.C.No.01 of 2017 has been commenced before the trial Court. The material on record further reveals that the respondent No.1/wife has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., for seeking maintenance from the petitioner/husband. Admittedly, the case in M.C.No.01 of 2017 is filed by the respondent No.1/wife in the year 2017, and enquiry has also been commenced in the Maintenance Case. Therefore, at this stage, if the case in M.C.No.01 of 2017 is transferred from the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala to the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Guntur District, the proceedings in the said Maintenance Case, case will further be delayed. Furthermore, the case in M.C.No.01 of 2017 cannot be transferred only on the ground that the petitioner is staying at Guntur District. 5. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha1 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.” 6. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both sides, in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case law that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be considered than that of the inconvenience of the husband and as noticed supra, the enquiry in M.C.No.01 of 2017, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala, has already been commenced before the trial Court, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that at this stage, the case in M.C.No.01 of 2017 cannot be transferred from the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Chirala to the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Guntur, where the petitioners are currently residing. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 do not find any merit and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioner and as such, the present Transfer Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit. 7. With the above observations, the Transfer Criminal Petition is dismissed. 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: 17.04.2026 SRT