IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7301 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. Sri. R. Lokesh Aged about 35 years, S/o Sri. R. Ramamurthy Reddy, Residing at H.No.3-41, Muthirevula Puttalapattu, Chittoor – 517 127, Andhra Pradesh. Now residing at:
No.E-4, “Saveri Winston”, Panathur, Near Geethanjali School, Marthahalli, Bengaluru – 560 037.
2. Sri. R. Ramamurthy Reddy Aged about 64 years, S/o Sri. R. Subba Reddy, Residing at H.No.3-41, Muthirevula Puttalapattu, Chittoor – 517 127, Andhra Pradesh.
3. Smt. Renuka R Aged about 54 years, W/o Sri. R. Ramamurthy Reddy, Residing at H.No.3-41, Muthirevula Puttalapattu, Chittoor – 517 127, Andhra Pradesh.
4. Smt. Divya Aged about 30 years, W/o Sri. Jaganmohan Reddy, Presently residing at No.E-4, “Saveri Winston”, Panathur, Near Geethanjali School, Marthahalli, Bengaluru – 560 037.
5. Dr. Jaganmohan Reddy Aged about 37 years, S/o Sri. Raja Reddy, Presently residing at No.E-4, “Saveri Winston”, Panathur, Near Geethanjali School, Marthahalli, Bengaluru – 560 037. …Petitioners (By Sri. Raghavendra K., Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By the Station House Officer, Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru.
Rep. by SPP, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001. …Respondent (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. praying to transfer the case in S.C. No.7/2014 presently pending on the file of 61st Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH No.72), Bengaluru City to the court of the 45th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH No.46), Bengaluru City for further continuation of the trial and disposal of the case at the earliest point of time.
This criminal petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 5 in S.C.No.7/2014 are being tried for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 307, 506, 201 and 406 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, are seeking for transfer of the said case, now pending on the file of 61st Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-72), Bengaluru City, Bengaluru to the Court of 45th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-46), Bengaluru City, Bengaluru, contending inter-alia that material witnesses of the prosecution namely CW1 to CW3 have been examined as PW1 to PW3 and they have been already cross-examined/re- examined/discharged. When PW4 is yet to be cross- examined proceedings i.e., SC No.7/2014 which was pending on the file of CCH-46 came to be transferred to CCH-72 by a notification dated 26.07.2017 and as such he prays for re-transferring the said case to the original court namely, CCH-46 since learned Sessions Judge, who recorded the evidence of PW1 to PW3 had seen the manner in which said witnesses while being inside the witness box had answered and has also noticed their behavioral pattern.
2. Learned HCGP would vehemently oppose for the proceedings being re-transferred contending inter-alia that by virtue of notification issued on the administrative side, proceedings came to be transferred and there being no demeanour of witnesses having been recorded when PW1 to PW3 were in the witness box question of retransferring does not arise and as such he contends no ground is made out by the petitioner. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records, it would disclose that by notification bearing No.ADM-I(A)No.600/2017 dated 29.07.2017 issued by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, Bengaluru S.C.No.7/2014 which was pending on the file of CCH-46 has been withdrawn and transferred to a newly constituted court namely CCH-72. When there is no demeanour of witnesses recorded by the presiding officer of CCH-46 plea of the petitioner for re-transferring the case cannot be accepted.
4. In that view of matter, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly, petition stands rejected.
In view of the disposal of main petition, I.A.No.1/2017 for stay does not survive for consideration. Hence, I.A.No.1/2017 is hereby dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE MBM