SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13238

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
.......... .......... .......... – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PADAGIRI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT – Respondent
TR.P(CRL.) NO. 13 OF 2026 | SC NO.1174 OF 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: ADV SHRI.BHARAT VIJAY P.
For the Respondents: PP. ADV. SMT. C.SEENA

Transfer of criminal cases for convenience of parties and witnesses is valid under applicable provisions.

Headnote:The petition for transfer of SC No. 1174 of 2019 was filed under Section 447 of BNSS, as the complainant, suffering from a brain tumor, could not travel to Alathur for hearings; the court found the majority of witnesses resided in Thiruvananthapuram and allowed the transfer. The court emphasized the convenience of the complainant and witnesses in rendering justice. The transfer petition is allowed, and the case is moved to the Fast Track Special Court in Thiruvananthapuram.

Table of Content
1. introduction to transfer petition and rationale. (Para 1 , 2)

O R D E R

(Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2026)

The defacto complainant in SC No. 1174 of 2019 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court, Alathur, Palakkad District arising out of Crime No. 161 of 2018 of Padagiri Police Station filed this transfer petition under Section 447 of BNSS praying for transferring the above case to the Fast Track Special Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

2. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the victim is suffering from brain tumor is residing at Thiruvananthapuram and is unable to travell to Alathur. Therfore he prayed for transferig the case from the Fast Track Special Court, Alathur to Fast Track Special Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Further according to the learned Counsel, most of the witnesses involed in this case are also residing at Thiruvananthapuram.

3. The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/

accused has not opposed the petition. The learned Public Proseuctor opposed the petition.

4. From the witness list it can be seen that CWs 1 to

4, 11 to 13, 15 to 18, 21, 23 and 24 are from Thiruvananthapuram. Since the accused, the defacto complainant and majority of the witnesses are hailing from Thiruvananthapuram District, I am inclined to allow this petition.

In the result, this transfer petition is allowed. SC No. 1174 of 2019 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court, Alathur, Palakkad District is transfered to Fast Track Special Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The learned Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Alathur is directed to transmit the entire records relating to this case to the Fast Track Special Court, Thiruvananthapuram, forthwith.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top