THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.13 of 2026

ORDER:

The petitioners herein have filed the present petition under Section 447 of the B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, seeking transfer of C.C.No.1002 of 2025, on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vijayawada, to the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, for trial and disposal of the same.

2. Heard Sri B. Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1/State.

3. Perused the material available on record.

4. The grounds urged by the petitioners for seeking transfer of C.C.No.1002 of 2025, on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vijayawada, to the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, are that accused No.3/petitioner No.3 herein is staying at her parents’ house along with her two children at Bhimavaram. Another ground urged by the 3^rd petitioner is that she has filed three cases against the 2^nd respondent, i.e., C.C.No.28 of 2025 and M.C.No.3 of 2025 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (145 of BNSS), on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram, and a domestic violence case in S.R.No.4024 of

2025, on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, and the same are pending for adjudication. Another ground urged by the petitioners is that there is a threat at the hands of the 2^nd respondent.

5. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would contend that all the witnesses cited in the charge sheet are residing within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vijayawada, and the alleged offence is said to have taken place within the same jurisdiction, and the case is pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vijayawada.

6. As can be seen from the first ground urged by the petitioners seeking transfer, the two children are of tender age, being about five and seven years respectively, and are currently staying with the 3^rd petitioner at her parents’ house at Bhimavaram. In a criminal case, every alleged offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. The cause of action and the alleged offence as per the First Information Report, are alleged to have arisen within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court at Vijayawada. Admittedly, in the case at hand, the alleged offence took place within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Vijayawada. The cause of action also arose at Vijayawada, the charge sheet was filed by the police against the petitioners herein before the Court at Vijayawada. The material on record prima facie reveals that all the witnesses are residing within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Vijayawada. In such a case, if the matter is withdrawn and transferred to West Godavari District at Bhimavaram, all the witnesses will face considerable inconvenience. Another ground urged by the petitioners seeking transfer of the case is that there is a threat at the hands of the 2^nd respondent. Admittedly, no prima facie material has been placed before this Court to show that there is any threat from the hands of 2^nd respondent. A mere apprehension of threat, without any prima facie evidence, is not a ground for considering the request of the petitioners for transfer of a case from one place to another.

7. The Apex Court in a case of Nahar Singh Yadav &Anr Vs Union of India &ors, 2011 (1) SCC 307 held as follows:

“24. Thus, although no rigid and inflexible rule or test could be laid down to decide whether or not