Rukmini W/O Kamalakar vs Janalakshmi & Anr on 30 November, 2018

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Rukmini W/O Kamalakar vs Janalakshmi & Anr on 30 November, 2018

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                             1


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                     KALABURAGI BENCH

            DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

                          BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

            CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200958 OF 2018

BETWEEN:-

RUKMINI W/O KAMALAKAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD & SMALL PETTY BUSINESS
R/O H.NO.11-757/1, MSK MILL ROAD
SHAH HUSSAIN CHILLA, BORABAI NAGAR
BRAMHAPUR, KALABURAGI
                                            ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI N. KRISHNACHARYA, ADVOCATE)

AND:-

1. JANALAKSHMI FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.
   HEAD OFFICE RAJASHREE SAROJA PALAZA
   34/1, ANDRI ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR
   BENGALURU - 560 027

2. JANALAKSHMI FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.
   BRANCH OFFICE, NEAR DIST. COURT COMPLEX
   PRAJAVANI OFFICE, KALABURAGI
                                       ... RESPONDENTS

                             ***

     THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 407 R/W SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE CRIMINAL CASE IN
C.C.NO.10289/2018 FROM XXVI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
                                 2


MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU TO CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.
COURT, KALABURAGI FOR DISPOSAL OF THE SAID CRIMINAL
CASE FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

    THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                            ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. This petition is filed under Section 407 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking transfer of the criminal case in C.C.No.10289/2018 from XXVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru to Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Kalaburagi.

3. It is averred in the petition that the respondents have filed a complaint against the petitioner herein alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The said complaint is pending on the file of XXVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

4. The only ground on which the petitioner has sought for transfer of the proceedings is that the petitioner's husband is blind and visually impaired. First and foremost, no material is produced before the Court to show that the husband of the 3 petitioner is suffering from such a handicap. Even if it is believed that the husband of the petitioner is blind and visually impaired, the same does not come in the way of the petitioner attending the proceedings before the Court. That apart, the proceedings are said to be pending within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench of the High Court at Bengaluru. It is not known why the petition is filed before this Bench at Kalaburagi. In any case, no justifiable ground is made out by the petitioner for transfer of the proceedings.

Hence, the petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE LG

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court