The High Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain a transfer petition under Section 407 CrPC for transfer of a criminal case from one Court of First Class Magistrate to another Court of the same jurisdiction within the same Sessions division, unless the petitioner has first approached the Sessions Court and the relief has been declined.

JUDGMENT

1. In these petitions, the point is about restriction on jurisdiction of the High Court as per the proviso to Sec. 407(2) CrPC, relating to transfer of criminal cases from one Court of First Class Magistrate within the territorial jurisdiction of one of the Additional Sessions Court to Court of same jurisdiction in jurisdiction of another Additional Sessions Court, however, both within the same Sessions division.

2. Transfer Criminal Petition Nos.4, 5 and 6 of 2022 are filed under Sec. 407 CrPC seeking to withdraw M.C.No.45 of 2021, D.V.C.No.17 of 2021, and C.C.No.1347 of 2021 on the file of the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, and to transfer the same to the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge or any other competent Court at Tenali.

3. Heard Sri K.Rama Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and Sri Dheera Kanishk, learned counsel representing the 1st respondent/State.

4. The 1st respondent raised preliminary objection as regards the maintainability of the transfer criminal petitions for having been filed at the first instance before this Court for transfer of a case from one Court to another Court within the Sessions Division, without first approaching the Sessions Court concerned as required under Sec. 407(2) CrPC.

5. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent adopted the said contentions.

6. Placing reliance on the decisions of this Court in B.Sreedhara Reddy v. State of A.P., 1988 (2) APLJ 278. learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case is maintainable before this Court. In the said decision, it was held that under Sec. 408 CrPC, the Sessions Judge has neither the power to direct committal of a case to the Sessions Court nor can he order transfer of a case from one criminal Court to another of a superior jurisdiction, as a consequence of which the crucial proviso to sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 407 CrPC, would have no operation to debar maintenance of an application under Sec. 407 CrPC before the High Court either for transfer of a case to a Court of superior jurisdiction or for committal of a case to the Sessions Court on the ground that no such application was made earlier before the Sessions Court under Sec. 408 and rejected by it.

7. Sri Dheeraj Kanishk, learned counsel representing the 1st respondent distinguished the application of this decision to the case on hand on the ground that all these petitions are filed to transfer the case from one Court to another Court of the same type of jurisdiction in the hierarchy and unlike in cases in the cited decision, in the present case, the Sessions Court has authority to transfer a case from one Court to another Court of coordinate jurisdiction within the same Sessions Division.

8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case is sought to be transferred from I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Narasaraopet to the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Tenali, both of which fall under the jurisdiction of different Additional Sessions Courts. He further placed reliance on the decisions in M.Shyam Prasad Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1992 Law Suit (AP) 306. Talari Mala Obulesu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1992 Law Suit (AP) 226. K.Sriramulu v. T.Mariyadas, 2020 SCC Online AP 4409. Prathikantam Gunvardhan Raju v. PrathikanthamUma Venkata Satyarenuka, 2021 SCC Online AP 1404. But those cases are not decided on this issue and thus, they have no application.

9. Before proceeding further, it is profitable to mention Sec. 407(1) and 407(2) CrPC to the extent of their relevancy to the present case and they read as under:

"407. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals.

(1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court-

(a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or

(b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise, or

(c) that an order under this sec. is required by any provision of this