Dismissed

Mathala Srinu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC20 Mar 2021TRCRLP/20/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a transfer petition filed to remove a criminal case from a Special Court for elected representatives. The court held that since the case is pending before a specially designated court and the sister case has already been transferred to a Principal Junior Civil Judge, the requested transfer cannot be granted.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of S.C.No.4 of 2018 from Special Court to Assistant Sessions Judge, Chodavaram was declined.

Mathala Srinu, Vs State of Andhra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO.20 of 2020

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This Transfer Criminal Petition is filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking withdrawal of S.C.No.4 of 2018 (old S.C.No.58 of 2010) from the file of Special Court for trial of cases relating to elected MPs and MLAs, Vijayawada, Krishna District and transfer the same to the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Chodavaram, Visakhapatnam to be tried along with S.C.No.113 of 2010.

¶4

The brief facts of the case are that basing on the complaint filed by one Malireddy Mahalakshmi Naidu before Deverapalli Police Station, Visakhapatnam, crime No.32 of 2006 was registered against respondent Nos.2 to 14 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 I.P.C. and Section 21 of the Indian Arms Act. Subsequently the same was numbered as S.C.No.113 of 2020 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge Court, Chodavaram. Thereafter basing on the complaint given on 04.08.2006 by the mother of respondent No.3 herein, crime No.33 of 2006 was registered against the petitioner and others for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. After investigation, the Police have referred the case as “mistake of fact”.

¶5

Subsequently after inordinate delay of 2 years 2 months respondent No.3 herein filed a private complaint in respect of the same incident and it was referred to the Police by the Judicial First

¶6

¶7

Class magistrate, Chodavaram and Police have registered crime No.57 of 2008. In the protest petition filed by respondent No.3 it was categorically mentioned that in respect of the same incident, crime No.32 of 2006 was registered and the same is pending vide PRC No.3 of 2007. After examining the protest petition, Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chodavaram passed an order dated 18.09.2009 in PRC No.18 of 2009 observing that there is prima facie case against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 201, 147, 148 and 506 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and as it is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions the case was committed to Sessions Court, Visakhapatnam under Section 209(a) and the petitioner is shown as A5 and one B.Muthyala Naidu, MPTC as A1 along with eight other accused. The same is numbered as S.C.No.58 of 2010 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Chodavaram.

¶8

The further case of the petitioner is that the State of Andhra Pradesh has issued GORT No.215 dated 03.04.2018 by exercising powers conferred by the proviso to subsection 1 of section 11 read with clause (j) of Section 2 read with Section 7 and 9 (1) of Cr.P.C. and specified Andhra Pradesh as the local area for the purpose of establishing a special court for the trial of offences relating to the elected members of the parliament and members of the Legislative Assembly as sanctioned in G.O.Ms.No.26 dated 26.02.2018 and established a special court to try the offences relating to elected Member of the Parliament and Members of the Legislative Assembly arising out of the entire area of State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

¶10

Accordingly Registrar (Administration) issued proceedings on 12.04.2018. In pursuance of the same Senior Civil Judge, Chodavaram passed an order dated 20.04.2018 and as A1 in S.C.No.58 of 2010 is MLA of Madugula Constituency, transferred S.C.Nos.58 of 2010 and 113 of 2010 as both the cases are case and counter case. The special court returned the case bundle in S.C.No.113 of 2010 as it does not come under its jurisdiction and S.C.No.58 of 2010 was renumbered as S.C.No.4 of 2018. As both the cases arise out of one incident, they should be tried by one Court. Hence, the present petition is filed seeking transfer.

¶11

Heard Sri Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as on the date of registration of the complaint, A1 is not a member of Legislative Assembly. He further submits that where two cases arise out of the same incident they have to be tried and disposed of by the same Court by pronouncing the judgment on the same day and it is necessary legal requirement for preventing conflicting of decisions. As such to avoid conflicting judgments, his prayer may be allowed.

¶13

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the relief sought to withdraw S.C.No.4 of 2018 (old S.C.No.58 of 2010) from the file of the Special Court and transfer the same to the file of Assistant Sessions Judge to be tried along S.C.No.113 of 2010 is not maintainable for the reason that

¶14

¶15

the specially designated court will have jurisdiction only to try cases against MLAs and MPS. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 further submits that in view of the orders passed by this Court in Crl.R.C.No.3082 of 2017 the Court below has deleted Section 307 of I.P.C. Hence, only 324 IPC is retained. As such the matter was transferred to Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chodavarm and it is renumbered as C.C.No.1734 of 2020. Hence, the matter cannot be transferred to Sessions Court as sought by the petitioner.

¶16

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 further submits that A1 in S.C.No.4 of 2018 has filed Tr.Crlp.No.10 of 2019 with similar relief and it was withdrawn on 18.02.2019 when the matter was posted under the caption ‘for orders’. On the same day the present transfer petition is filed which is nothing but pure abuse of process of law.

¶17

Heard both the counsel and perused the record. Both the cases are of the year 2010 and the case sought to be transferred is pending before Special Court for trial of Cases relating to elected MPs and MLAs, Vijayawada, Krishna District. When a case is pending before the Court specially established for the purpose of trying particular cases, the same cannot be transferred to any other Court due to lack of jurisdiction. Further as C.C.No.1734 of 2020 is now pending on file of Principle Junior Civil Judge at Chodavaram, the prayer in this petition cannot be granted.

¶18

¶19

In view of the above and on the ground that S.C.No.113 of 2010 which is pending on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge is transferred to Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chodavaram and renumbered as C.C.No.1734 of 2020 after deletion of Section 307 I.P.C. pursuant to the order passed by this Court in Crl.R.C.No.3082 of 2017, this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶20

11. Accordingly this transfer criminal petition is dismissed.

¶21

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶22

___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J

¶23

Date :20.03.2021 IKN

¶24

¶25

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶26

(dismissed)

¶27

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.20 of 2020

¶28

20.03.2021

¶29

IKN

Mathala Srinu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathala Srinu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gulivindula Harish Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Venkata Subbaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dalari Yedukondalu, Vs Mis Shri Ram City Union Finance Vinukonda.

Pydi at Paidi Srikanth Vs Pydi at paidi Priyanka

Iragamreddy Naga Dasthagiri Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sahik Simpathi Prakruddin @ Shaik Cheeparthi Fakuruddin @ Shaik Simpathi Fakuruddin Fakruvalli @ Sa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh