Dismissed

M/s Aditya Enterprises Project Vartak Nagar v. Smt. Chileveru Prameela Reddy

Telangana HC10 Dec 2021TRCRLP/5/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer Criminal Petition filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. seeking transfer of C.C. No. 172 of 2016 from the 1st Special Magistrate, Malkajgiri to another court in the Malkajgiri Complex. The bench noted that a similar petition before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge had been dismissed as baseless. With no presence on either side, the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Transfer Criminal Petition No. 5 of 2021 and pending miscellaneous applications are dismissed.

M/s Aditya Enterprises Project Vartak Nagar… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEN/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶6

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 M/s Aditya Enterprises Project Vartak Nagar, Rep by^{its As-sociatesSri Sanjay} Dattatreya Bhalerao, Aged About 52 Years, Occ: Business^{Oio 501, FifthFloor,} Samartl'i Arcade, Opposite Holy Cross, Convent^{School, K- Villa Thane( West)}

¶9

2 Sanjay Dattatreya Bhalerao, Aged About 52 Years, Occ.^{Business O/o 501, Fifth} Floor,-Sama(h Arcade Opposite Holy Cross, Convent School,^{K- Villa Thane} (West)

¶10

...TRANSFER PETITIONERyACCUSED No.1 and²

¶11

AND

¶12

1 Smt. Chileveru Prameela Reddy, W/o Chileveru^{Anji Reddy,Aged about 51 Year,} Occ. House wife Presently R/o Flat No. 303,^{NivedithaApartmentsParamal} Nagar, Kapra, lvledchal District

¶13

2 The State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENT No.1 and 2

¶15

Petition under Section 407 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Tr. Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to withdraw the CC.No.'1 72 of 2016^pending on the file of 1st Special Magistrate l,4alkajgiri, and transfer to any of Hon'ble XVll Metropolitan Magistrate lt4alkajgiri and XVlll N/etropolitan [t/agistrate or XIX Metropolitan ltrlagistrate or 3rd Special Court Presiding in Same Malkajgiri Court Complex^presiding in the same building.

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 407 (6) of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Tr. Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all the proceedings in C.C No. 172 ol 2016 pending on the file of 1st Special Magistrate lVlalkajgiri till the disposal of transfer petition.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the I,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ir,4. Rathan Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.2 and of Sri Joundla Govardhan Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 (being not present)

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA^KANNDGANTI

¶21

TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO. 5 OF 2O21}

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

The present Transfer Criminal^Petition is^{filed underSection} 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking^{to transferC.C.No 172} ol 2016 on the fi1e of the I Special Magistrate,^{Malkajgiri, to any of the} Courts in Malkajgiri Court Complex.

¶24

The petitioner has moved Tr.Cr1.M.P.No.6O29 of²⁰⁷⁹ before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at^{L.B. Nagar,} seeking transfer of C.C.No.172 ol 2076 on the file^{of the} I^Special Magistrate, Malkajgiri. The reasons for transfer as^{stated in the} petition are that the Presiding Officer is granting adjournments and the counsel for the complainant has made certain comments in^the Court and with the attitude of the Magistrate, they have^no confidence and faith in the Court and further their apprehension^is that justice will not be done to them. Having considered all the contentions, the learned Judge has dismissed the transfer^petition and the learned Judge observed that all the allegations are illusory and without any basis. Now, this transfer criminal^petition is moved before this Court by reiterating the very same allegations.

¶25

This matter came up on 03.72.2021 and as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption "for dismissal". Today also, none appears on either side. Perused the entire material on record.

¶26

The Court below has considered all the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and has dismissed the transfer petition, as baseless. If the petitions have to be transferred on these grounds, just because the learned Judge is granting adjournments, the petitioner has lost confidence on the Court and came to a

¶27

¶28

conclusion that the^{learnedJudge is acting prejudiceto his interest} and on these^{groundsif the petitions are to be transferredfrom one} Court to the^{other, it wouldbe very difficult to the learned Judgeand} on these kind of^{baselessallegations,casescannot be transferred} from one Court to the other'

¶29

Accordingly, the^{TransferCriminal Petition is dismissed'} Miscellaneous applications,^{ifany, pending shallstand}

¶30

dismissed.

¶31

SD/. I. NAGA LAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1'ThelvletropolitanSessionsJudge_cum-lAdditionalDistrictJudge,Ranga Reddv District at^L.B.Nagar.

¶37

The I Special^{Magistrate at l/alkajgiri' lyO.eE!?!:}

¶38

One CC^{to Sri M.Rathan Singh, AdvocateLOPUUI}

¶39

;. o;; cc i;^{5r.i Joundla Govaidhan Reddv,AdvocaleIQPUCl.-}

¶40

i;; CCs^{to the Public Prosecutor' High Courtfor the State ot lelangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶41

Two CD CoPies

7, One Spare^CoPY

Igbr fi'

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1011212021

f., $ I !ii'{ a
0:
() )
rs6 tl'','l?$l

¶47

ORDER

¶48

TR.CRL.P.No.5 of²⁰²¹

¶49

DISMISSING THE TR.CRL.P.

¶50

K.
e

M/s Aditya Enterprises Project Vartak Nagar v. Smt. Chileveru Prameela Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Aditya Enterprises Project Vartak Nagar v. Smt. Chileveru Prameela Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Modiem Srinivas Rao and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and another

KanishkaBorkar Vs Smt. PiyaliSinha

P.Avinash Vs The State of Telangana

Chittari Mallesham Vs The state of Telangana and another

Miss Aliya Vs The State of Telangana

V. Vijaya Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana