Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
J.Lakshmi Nitisha Baalay vs G.Prudhvi Raj Kumar Reddy on 19 November, 2020
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.45 of 2019
ORDER:-
This transfer criminal petition is filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C") to transfer C.C.No.162 of 2017 on the file of Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandyal, Kurnool District to any Court in Vijayawada or Guntur or to any other District other than Kurnool District.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent-State. This Court by order dated 11.06.2019 permitted the petitioner to take out personal notice on the 1st respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo stating that notice was returned with an endorsement "addressee left without instructions".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Ms.Avanija submits that the 1st respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short "NI Act") which was numbered as C.C.No.162 of 2017 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandyal. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner lured the complainant that her husband is engaged in mining, excavation and marketing in Madagascar, South Africa and crores of rupees have been invested in the said business. The complaint entered into an MOU and gave an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- to the petitioner. Later, the petitioner approached the complainant for further investment to a tune of Rs.75,00,000/- , which was given to the petitioner on 22.03.2016 and the 2 petitioner assured to return the said amount within 48 months. Thereafter when the complainant visited the Madagascar, he found the work to be unsatisfactory and he demanded the petitioner to return the amount. On that the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.595676 dated 05.01.2017 drawn on Axis Bank, Madhapur Branch for Rs.25,00,000/- and the same was dishonoured for the reasons "funds insufficient". Basing on the same, the complainant filed the C.C.No.162 of 2017.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the complaint was filed after four years from the date of incident. Further, the respondent is a habitual offender and there are number of cases against him and he is also arrested in Red Sanders case. Learned counsel submits that whenever the petitioner is attending the Court in Kurnool, she has been threatened by the respondent herein demanding her to pay the money. She submits that the petitioner belongs to a political family, which is attached to the ruling party, as such there is threat to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in S.Raghuramaiah Vs. Government of A.P.1, wherein this Court observed that the Superintendent of Police has placed a report stating that certain notorious factionists are operating in Kurnool District, wherein the names of the 1st respondent herein, his uncle and father are shown at S.Nos.6 to 8. Learned counsel also filed a newspaper clipping in Deccan Chronicle dated 11.07.2017, wherein the police seized 1.1 tonnes of red sander logs and the 1 1998 (1) ALD 304 3 name of the 1st respondent herein was also mentioned as red sanders smuggler. Basing on the above, learned counsel submits that in the light of the above background of 1st respondent and his family, if the petitioner has to attend the Court in Kurnool District, there is threat to her life.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Gurcharan Dass Chadha Vs. State of Rajasthan2 and Abdul Nazar Madani Vs. State of Tamilnadu3 wherein it was held that "If it appears that the dispensation of criminal justice is not possible impartially and objectively and without any bias, before any Court or even at any place, the appropriate Court may transfer the case to another Court where it feels that holding of fair and proper trial is conducive. No universal or hard-and-fast rules can be prescribed for deciding a transfer petition which has always to be decided on the basis of the facts of each case".
7. In the judgment of this Court in S.Raghuramaiah's case, there is mention about the family members of the 1st respondent including his father and uncle that they belong to factionist family and even the Deccan Chronicle newspaper clipping shows that the 1st respondent is actively involved in red sanders smuggling. Therefore, this Court finds force in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is threat to the petitioner, who is a lady, if she has to attend the Court in Kurnool District. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to transfer C.C.No.162 of 2017 on the file of Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandyal, 2 AIR 1966 SC 1418 3 (2000) 6 SCC 204 4 Kurnool District to the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Vijayawada.
8. Accordingly, the transfer criminal petition is allowed and C.C.No.162 of 2017 on the file of Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandyal, Kurnool District is withdrawn and the same is transferred to the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Vijayawada. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI 19th November, 2020 PVD 5 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI (ALLOWED) TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.45 of 2019 19th November, 2020 PVD