The State of Telangana, Vs Dasari Vijaya Ravinder Kumar @ Ravinder

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR T AT HYDffiBHE^{OF TELANGANA}

¶2

MOND,11I.IHE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER rwo rHousANo nruo rw=ruriiG'."-,.

¶3

rHE HoNouRA".tltfrtlJ.rcE K. suJANA

¶4

TRAN SF ER CRlMINAL PETITI ON NO :133O F 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

The State of Telangana, through Station t_ District, Reo Hyderabad.' uyr"neeuoiicF;;;.,1i;,'rfi []i."."fi,e]i816[,53i?j,ix"liS] AND ...pETlTlONERy Complainant"- -.

¶7

AND

¶8

.

¶9

1 . Dasari Vijaya Ravinder Kumar @ Ravinder. S/o 49 years, Occ. Aorir s " J a n n a ra m M,, d,r ('llli'" I bl# EX l$i'i' ili tliJilfl : i-@, rB\X ffi;p"Tii "

¶10

Dhamuka Lalitha r6)^Lalithavva, W/o. Kanthaiah, age /0 years Ryo. Rendtaguda Vilagiof Jannaram M;r;;,ii$,,,M;r;;,ii$,,,

¶11

Rendtaguda Vilagiof Jannaram M;r;;,ii$,,,M;r;;,ii$,,,

¶12

Dhamuka Jeevammr a' wo Bapu Rl/o. Rendlaguda Village of Jannaram

¶13

Mandal (A-4)

¶14

Dhamuka Baou rO B

¶15

vi riis" ;i r"r;i'*X#i,i"?l[?tf3'^{Kanthaiah, age 54} vea^rs R/o Rend rasuda

¶16

Dasari Vasantha. W

¶17

D;il;r;Triil:ffi;i(X%i'o' '^{ase 50 vears R/o Dharmaraopet} Vitase or

¶18

Bhandhela Ravamall

¶19

viil;s; ;l;:;;';ffi'fi*@.}i?Tin^{S/oMarlaiah, age 51} vears Rl/o.^ponkar

¶20

' ,ti"",i"1li,1,r.J,Yo1ill,fliy^{n"vr,",u @ Benjman,R/o ponkarVi,ase} or

¶21

Lashetti Sathvam rO rr,4r.oli'r;[i'ii"'-,satvanarava8xi#"-ir?l1,iiy3ixF.%:fl-d:fl g:"fl ,,

¶22

Petition Under Section preasedi;id;;;;;:E:;r:1J#"T:3,8,.?I1n:,1,,j,""i:l;:::??[IAI":: Magistrate Luxettioet and the same may be transfeirei to speciar Judge for Triar c J ij nl nii rl [ ] i' io' ii :l i&Ti"rJ.jJ :".Jfi l,J:t,# ", o n r *iir, s p r H c ir " il

¶23

Counset for the petitioner: ADDTTIONAL pUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. LAKSHMI MANOHAR

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELAIGANAAT} HYDERABAI)

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SMT.^{JUSTICE K. SU.I, \NA}

¶28

TRAN SFER CRIMINAL PETITI^{oN No.133OI' 2()25}

¶29

DATE: 15.12.2O25

¶30

Between:

¶31

The State of Telangar-ra, Through Station Housc^Officer, Jannararn P.S., Mancherial^District, Rep- by the Public Prosccutor, High Court for the State of^Telangana, Hy derabad

¶32

PetiLion,: /complainanl

¶33

AND

¶34

Dasari Vij aya Ravinder K.umar and 7 others.

¶35

Responrl nts/ A 1.3 to r,8,9 and¹¹

¶36

ORDER

¶37

This'lransfer Crimin.rl Petition^{is filed by thrr prosecution} seeking transfer of C.C.^{No.328 of 2Ol9 from tlL' filc of the} learned .Judicial First Class^{Magistrate, Luxxettipet-o the Court} of the learned Special Judge for^{Trial of Casesunderthe} SCs/STs^(POA) Act, Adiiabad, to^{be tried alongv'r -h Spl. S.C.} No.3,1 ol 2O21, in order to avoid conflicting^decisions.

¶38

\

¶39

2

¶40

Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondents

¶41

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that. there are case and counter-case proceedings between the parties arising out of the same incident and that both matters should be tried by the same Court to avoid conflicting^judgments and to determine who the aggressor was. Accordingly, he requested that C.C. No.328 of 2019 be transferred to the Special .Iudge for Trial of Cases under the SCs/STs (POA) Act, Adilabad.

¶42

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in C.C.No.328 of 2019, neither th.e de-facto complainant nor the accused has hled any application seeking transfer, and that there is no inct-rnvenience to the parties in continuing the proceedings before the learned Juclicial First Class Magistrate, Lr-rxxettipet. He further submitted that the respondent-accused is an elderly person and would face hardship in travelling from Lr..xxettipet to Adilabad for evcry adjournment. In the alternatir.e, he prayed that if the Court were inclined to order transfer, the personal presence of the respondent-accused be dispensed with.

3

) \

t I

ubmissions^{made b'both the} UPon^{consideration of the s} 5 of the^{material av rilableon} learned^{cclunsclantl on Perusal} . No.328^{ol 2Ol9 'rn I SPl' S C'} record,^{it is eviclentrhat bothC C} No.34^{of 2021 arise out of the same incident and cot I titute case} ancl^{counter-caseln view of the settled legal prolt sition that} such^{matters must be tried by the same Cot I ; toavoid} conflicting^{decisions' thrs petitiondeserves to be alkl red'}

¶47

Tran sfer^{CriminalPetrtrorL} 1S allowed 6- Accordinglv'^the First^Class pending^{before the Judir:ie l} C.C.^{No.328 ol 2019} .^{is hereby[ransferred to th: Court of the} Magistrate^{, Luxxc ltiPet} he SCs/STs for Trial^{of Casesunder} learned^{SPecial Judge} .C. No.34^of (POA)^{Act, Adilabad'to be tried along with Spl} '2021

¶48

1 In^{vier,r' of the submisston made by learnecl: iunsel for the} respondent^{accused'the Presenceof the resPc'r dent-accused} bcfore^{thc triar court is dispensed with wheneverl,is presencers} no[^{required subject to the conditionthat the ]c rrned counsel} appearing^{for the respondent-accused before tLr trial Court is} directed^{to appear on behalf of the respondent ac:used on every} case of^{non-appea-rancec I the petitloner} date^{of hearingand in}

<br>

T*q

4

on the specific date so hxed by the triai Court for appearance,

¶53

this order gets vacated automatically

¶54

B. With the above observation, this Transfer Criminal

¶55

Petition is disposed of.

¶56

Miscellaneous petitions, il any pencling shall stand closed. Sd/- U. SUDHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR e //TRUE COPY//

¶57

//TRUE COPY//

¶58

SECTION OFFICER

¶59

To,
1 . The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Luxettipet, IVancherial Diskict.
2 The speciar Judge forTriar of cases undei G sc. lstr (poA)Act Adirabad
3 The station House officer Jannaram porice staiion, Mancheriar District.
4. Two CCs to public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at
Hyderabad. (OUT)
5. One CC to Sri. K Lakshmi Manohar, Advocate [OpUC]
6. Two CD Copies
Kul/DI Yn
kbg
---L-:-

HIGH COURT

DATEDI15112l202s

ORDER

TRCRLP.No.l33 ot 2025

¶64