2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17104
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Y.RAVI TEJA CHOWDARY – Appellant
Versus
D.TEJA SREE – Respondent
TRCRLP 28/2024
##PAGE1##
2025:APHC:58201
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION No.28 of 2024
ORDER:
The petitioner/respondent herein filed the present petition
under Section 407 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short,
‘the Cr.P.C.’), seeking to withdraw M.C.No.5 of 2023, on the file of
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttaparthy and transfer the
same to the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Penukonda
for trial and disposal.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:
i. The petitioner is none other than the husband of the
1st respondent and 1st respondent filed a maintenance
case vide M.C.No.5 of 2023 and now the present
maintenance case is pending before the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class at Puttaparthy. The petitioner
further pleaded that now he is residing at Penukonda at
where C.C.No.236 of 2023, on the file of Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Penukonda was filed by the
petitioner and the same is pending for adjudication. The
petitioner further pleaded that the 1st respondent and her
family members and their followers are threatening him
not to appear in maintenance case otherwise they will do
away with his life. He further pleaded that he is
##PAGE2##2
2025:APHC:58201
apprehending imminent danger to his life. As such he
filed this Tr.Crl.M.P.No.19 of 2023, on the file of Principal
District and Session Judge, Ananthapuramu, seeking to
transfer the M.C.No.5 of 2023 from the Court of learned
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttaparty to the Court
of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Penukonda
and the learned District Judge dismissed the said
application and that he is constrained to file the present
application.
3. Heard Sri K.Mohan Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri S.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the 1st
respondent and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for
the respondent No.2.
4. As seen from the material available on record, the 1st
respondent/wife approached the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Puttaparthy, seeking maintenance for maintaining her livelihood,
and it is also contended by the learned counsel for respondent
No.1 that respondent No.1/wife has been residing within the
jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Puttaparthy,
where M.C.No.5 of 2023 is pending. It is also brought to the notice
of the Court that another case is also pending for disposal before
the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Puttaparthy.
5. The grounds raised by the petitioner/husband seeking the
transfer of M.C. No. 5 of 2023 from the Judicial Magistrate of First
##PAGE3##3
2025:APHC:58201
Class, Puttaparthy, to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Penukonda, are that respondent No. 1, her family members, and
their followers are threatening him not to appear in the
maintenance case. Admittedly no prima facie material has been
placed on record to prove his contention in this petition.
6. It is well settled that mere threat cannot be considered as a
ground for transferring a maintenance case from one jurisdiction
to another, as consistently held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in
catena of judgments. The vague and vexatious allegations,
without any element of truth, that there is threat in the hands of the
respondent No.1 to the petitioner herein to appear before the
Court below cannot be considered for transferring maintenance
case filed by wife from one Court to another. Mere allegations of
threat or apprehension are not sufficient to order transfer unless
such apprehension is reasonable, genuine and supported by
prima facie material. Admittedly, no prima facie evidence is
produced by the petitioner to prove the alleged threat in the
present Transfer Criminal Petition.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the
maintenance case i.e., M.C. No. 5 of 2023, may be transferred to
another Court, namely the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Ananthapuramu. However, it is not the case of either party that the
petitioner/husband or respondent/wife resides in Ananthapuramu.
##