Allowed

Kaduri Suryakala, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC14 Sept 2016TRCRLP/168/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order allowing the transfer of an assigned criminal matrix (SC No.89 of 2015) from Parvathipuram to Vizianagaram. Transfer sought by the mother of the deceased who faces distance difficulties, approved by both counsels, and effected via the Principal Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.

What did the court decide?

SC No.89 of 2015 transferred from II Additional Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram to I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.

Kaduri Suryakala, Vs The State of Andhra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL

¶2

Tr.Crl.P.No.168 OF 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This petition is filed to withdraw S.C.No.89 of 2015 from the file of II Additional Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram and transfer the same to the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.

¶5

Mother of the deceased is the de facto complainant and she filed this petition. According to her affidavit, her deceased daughter fell in love with the 2^nd respondent and on convincing both families, the 2^nd respondent married her daughter on 08/09.10.2009 at Simhachalam and both of them lived happily for a period of three and half years and thereafter, the 2^nd respondent and his family members started harassing her daughter for additional dowry and suspecting her fidelity and also used to engage people to watch her movements and finally she committed suicide on 21.07.2014 and the same was informed to them. She stated that she lodged a complaint before Salur Town Police Station, which was registered as Crime No.109 of 2014 and the same is pending before II Additional Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram. She stated that she is a resident of Garividi Village and the sons of the deceased daughter, who are aged 5 and 3 ½ years are under her care and custody, and it is difficult for her to go to Parvathipuram from Garividi, which is about 110 kms away. For these reasons, she prayed for transfer of S.C.No.89 of 2015 from the file of II Additional Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram

¶6

MSKJ,J

¶7

¶8

and transfer the same to the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.

¶9

Both counsel submitted that they have no objection to transfer the case.

¶10

Considering reasons stated in the affidavit and also considering the request of both the counsel, S.C.No.89 of 2015 is withdrawn from the file of II Additional Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram and transferred to the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram, for disposal in accordance with law.

¶11

Accordingly, the Transfer Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶12

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

¶13

closed in consequence.

¶14

__________________ M.S.K.JAISWAL,J

¶15

Date: 14.09.2016 kvrm

Kaduri Suryakala, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaduri Suryakala, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poranki Venkata Subba rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Ippili Pandu Rangarao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Anantha Venkateswara Rao Vs Anantha Rajya Lakshmi

Manupati Kanakamma Vs The State of Telangana

Darapu Ravi Shankar Vs Kammakaattu Srilakshmi , Darapu Srilakshmi

Y. Ramachandra Reddy Vs Ediga Maruthi Kumar