ORDER:

The Transfer Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 407 of Criminal Procedure Code(in short Cr.P.C) seeking transfer of C.C.No.4335 of 2021 pending on the file of Special Magistrate- cum-V Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Visakhapatnam District to Judicial First Class Magistrate, Srikakulam.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that respondent No.2 filed private complaint against her for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act on the ground that in a chit transaction with respondent No.2, she issued a cheque which was dishonoured and private complaint has been filed by the respondent No.2 under Section 190(1), 200 Cr.P.C, R/w Section 142 of Negotiable Instrument Act for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.

3. The petitioner submits that she is residing at Palasa and conducting business in Srikakulam but respondent No.2 filed cheque bounce case at Visakhapatnam, though they have got branches at Srikakulam. It is also the contention of the petitioner that she being a women and nobody is there to assist her to travel from Srikakulam to Visakhapatnam for each and every adjournment and she is also having witnesses at Srikakulam to support her defense but it is very expensive for her to take her witnesses to Visakhapatnam to support her case and if the calendar case is transferred to Judicial First Class Magistrate at Srikakulam from Special Magistrate-cum-V Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, no prejudice will be caused to respondent No.2. She prays to allow this petition.

4. The respondent not chosen to file counter though sufficient time is granted.

5. The learned counsel, Mr. L. Srinivas represented on behalf of Mr.

N. Harinath, learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. The learned counsel Mr. Y. Jagadeeswara Rao represented on behalf of respondent No.1/State submitted that they have no counter in the petition filed by the petitioner.

7. Now, the point that emerges for consideration of this Court is, Whether “ the petition is maintainable either in law or on facts”?

8. POINT: Before going to the merits of the case, it would be beneficial to quote Section 407 of CrPC, which reads 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 section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice, it may order-

(i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence;

(ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction;

(iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Session; or (iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself.

(2) The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on its own initiative: Provided that no application shall lie to the High Court for transferring a case from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in the same sessions division, unless an application for such transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected by him.

(3) Every application for an order under sub- section (1) shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Advocate- General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.

(4) When such application is made by an accused person, the High Court may direct him to execute a bond, w